Muniyamma v. The District Collector

Order This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 03.11.2025, which seeks the issuance of a patta in respect of the petitioner's property.

¶2The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the properties in Survey Nos. 39/8 and 40/1 of Naligabetta Agraharam Village, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District, along with a larger extent of land in the said village, were originally classified as Minor Inam lands. The petitioner's father had purchased the subject property from one Krishnan Chetty and remained in absolute possession of the same from the date of purchase. Consequent upon the demise of his father, the petitioner, along with his siblings, has been in possession and enjoyment of the property. The patta was issued in favour of the petitioner during November 1966. When the petitioner approached the third respondent for the issuance of individual patta to partition the properties among the siblings, he was informed that the said lands are classified as "Karadu" (rocky terrain/waste land) and therefore, a patta cannot be issued.

¶3It is further submitted that except for a single flat rock measuring about 3 to 4 cents, the entire stretch of land is fertile, cultivable land where the petitioner and his family have been continuously engaged in agriculture and Page3 of 6 raised horse gram in the land. Hence, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 05.08.2021, followed by a reminder representation dated 03.11.2025. As the petitioner's representations have not been considered to date, he has approached this Court.

¶4In reply, Ms. Inthu Karunakaran, learned Government Counsel, who accepts notice on behalf of the respondents, submitted that the petitioner's representation dated 03.11.2025 will be considered and disposed of by the authorities concerned within a period of eight weeks.

¶5Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Counsel appearing for the respondents, and perused the materials available on record.

¶6In view of the submissions made, this Court is of the opinion that lands filled with rocks or those unfit for cultivation due to the nature of the soil are generally classified as "Karadu". However, in the instant case, it is contended that the land is fertile and the petitioner has been cultivating it for several years. Even if a piece of land was originally classified as "Karadu", with the passage of time and continuous cultivation, such land can become fertile and fit for cultivation. The respondents initially withheld the issuance of a patta on the ground that the subject property is classified as "Karadu" in the official revenue Page4 of 6 registers. In the instant case, the petitioner has convincingly contended that through years of continuous cultivation, the soil composition has changed significantly. When a citizen integrates it into active agricultural use, the revenue administration cannot blindly rely on outdated classifications to deny statutory rights like a patta. Bypassing of years and uninterrupted cultivation has become the land fit for cultivation as on date. Consequently, the state is under a legal obligation to update its Town Survey or Revenue Records to ensure that the bonafide cultivator is granted secure land tenure.

¶7In light of the detailed observations made herein above, this Court finds substantial merit in the petitioner's grievance. The prolonged inaction of the revenue authorities in failing to consider the petitioner's representations— initially preferred on 05.08.2021 and followed by a reminder on 03.11.2025— amounts to a failure to exercise statutory duties. The physical transformation of the land from a rocky waste into an active, fertile agricultural holding necessitates immediate administrative review and reclassification under the relevant provisions of the Revenue Standing Orders (RSO).

¶8Accordingly, this Court issues a direction to the first respondent to initiate necessary field inspections and reclassify the subject property of the petitioner from "Karadu" to cultivable land. Upon completion of such Page5 of 6 reclassification, the first respondent is further directed to pass appropriate orders for the issuance of a fresh patta in the name of the petitioner. This entire exercise, including the final disposal of the petitioner's representation dated

03.11.2025, shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶9With the aforesaid specific directions, this Writ Petition stands formally disposed of. Consequently, no order as to costs is passed, and all connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed 07-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order SK To

¶1The District Collector Krishnagiri Distrct, District

¶2The Sub Collector Hosur

¶3The Tahsildhar Hsour Taluk, Hosur WPoNo.o25858oofo2026 KRISHNANoRAMASAMYoJ. sk WPoNo.o25858oofo2026 07-07-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 07-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Muniyamma W/o Bairappa, karuppalli Village, Somanathpuram Post, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The District Collector Krishnagiri Distrct, District 2. The Sub Collector Hosur 3. The Tahsildhar Hsour Taluk, Hosur ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the 2nd Respondent herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 03.11.2025, seeking issuance of patta in respect of the properties in S. No 39/8 and 40/1 of Naligabetta Agraharam village in Hosur Taluk, Krishangiri Distrct. For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.V.Karthikeyan For Respondent(s): Ms.Inthu Karunarakan, Government Counsel Page2 of 6