logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MHC 4930 My Notes print Preview print print
Court : Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Case No : W.P.(MD). No. 19260 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN
Parties : Sundaram Versus The Inspector General of Registration, Chennai & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: P. Ponraj, Advocate. For the Respondents: P. Sudarkodi Natchiyar, Government Standing Counsel.
Date of Judgment : 09-07-2026
Head Note :-
Constitution of India - Article 226 -
Judgment :-

(Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records pertaining to the impugned proceedings of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.9135/E4/2025 dated 12.02.2026 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and unsustainable and consequently, direct the respondents 1 to 3 to reclassify the petitioner's land comprised in Survey No.369/2B, measuring 1.66 Hectares (4 Acres), situated at Karadikkal Village, Tirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District, as patta land in the registration records/registration portal and remove the erroneous entry of Arasu Boomithana Nilangal (Boomidhana Land) and assign the appropriate guideline value to the said property, carry out all consequential corrections in the registration database and connected records, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.)

1. The petitioner is before this Court challenging the impugned order dated 12.02.2026 passed by the second respondent in proceedings bearing Reference No.Na.Ka.No.9135/E4/2025.

2. By the said proceedings, the second respondent declined to fix the guideline value of the subject property, relying upon the report of the District Revenue Officer dated 05.02.2026, bearing Reference No. Na.Ka.No.40478188/2025/G4.

3. The case of the petitioner appears to be that the land measuring an extent of 4 acres (1.66 hectares) in Survey No.369/2B, situated at Karadikkal Village, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District, was erroneously classified as land gifted to and falling within the purview of the Tamil Nadu Bhoodan Board.

4. It is the petitioner's case that the neighbouring land in Survey No. 142 (Old Survey No.409/4), measuring an extent of 1 acre and 20 cents, originally belonged to one Chinnasamy Servai. It is stated that the said Chinnasamy Servai donated an extent of 60 cents out of the said land, pursuant to which, the Revenue Authorities reclassified the donated portion as land covered under the Bhoodan Yojana Scheme.

5. It is further submitted that, by mistake, the land belonging to the petitioner's grandmother was also classified as land falling within the purview of the Bhoodan Yojana Scheme. According to the petitioner, the said mistake was subsequently rectified by the Special Officer (Grama Dhanam) in proceedings dated 25.05.1988 bearing Reference No. S.R. 1/276/T. The relevant portion of the said proceedings is reproduced below:



6. It is submitted that, pursuant to the aforesaid proceedings of the Special Officer (Grama Dhanam), the 'A' Register was restored and patta was issued in the name of the petitioner's grandmother, Kamatchi, under Patta No.296. However, notwithstanding the said restoration, the guideline value of the property continues to be shown as 'Nil'.

7. The respondents, acting on the communication of the District Revenue Officer, Madurai, dated 05.02.2026, declined the petitioner's request for fixation of the guideline value of the property. A copy of the said communication of the District Revenue Officer has not been enclosed to the impugned proceedings. However, the contents thereof have been extracted in the impugned order, which read as follows:



8. Once the Special Officer [Grama Dhanam] has reversed the entries and passed an order as early as 25.05.1988 in his proceedings bearing Reference in S.R.1/276/T, the Revenue Authorities ought to have effect the same by fixing the correct guideline value.

9. Considering the above, the impugned order dated 12.02.2026 stands quashed. The respondents 4 to 6 to give effect to the order of the Special Officer [Grama Dhanam] in his proceedings dated 25.05.1988, bearing Refernece in S.R.1/276/T. Thereafter, the first respondent shall pass appropriate orders. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by the respondents.

10. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
 
  CDJLawJournal