Nalina Ramachandran v. The District Collector Thiruvallur District

ORDER This writ petition is filed to call for the record of the 1st Respondent in Na.Ka.No.353311/2023/N1, dated 19.03.2024 and quash the same.

¶2Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the land comprised in S.No.397/1B, located at Mel Ayanambaam Road, Aanambakkam Village, Ambattur Taluk, Tiruvallur District is jointly owned by petitioner and M/s.P.S.Construction Private Limited. The patta No.6214, pertaining to the land measuring an extent of 28.50 Ares, was issued in favour of the petitioner and M/s.P.S.Construction Pvt. Ltd. Under these circumstances, one Mr.Thavarajan, filed a petition before the Revenue Department seeking a change in classification of a parcel of land measuring an extent of 0.14.50 ares, situated in S.No.397/1A, Ayyanampakkam Village, Ponnammalle Taluk, Tiruvallur District, since the same was erroneously classified as Tharisu land and to issue patta on his favour. Pursuant to which, the first respondent passed an order dated 19.03.2024 by merging S.Nos.397/1A and 397/1B as one survey number i.e., 397/1 and reclassified the same as Government Poromboke in the A-Register. Challenging the order of the first respondent dated 19.03.2024, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition. Page3 of 7

¶3Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that, as against the aforesaid order of the first respondent, the said Mr.Thavarajan filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Land Administration. Pursuant to which, the Commissioner of Land Administration vide proceedings dated 29.07.2025 directed the District Revenue Officer to reclassify the land in S.No.397/1A. Based on which, the District Revenue Officer vide proceedings dated

15.09.2025 directed the third respondent to reclassify the said land as patta land and issue patta in favour Mr.Thavarajan.

¶4It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order dated 15.09.2025 is squarely applicable to her case also i.e., S.No.397/1B and requested this Court remit back the matter to the respondents for fresh consideration.

¶5Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would fairly submit that, in the event this Court remits back the matter to the respondents, the same will be considered afresh.

¶6Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. Page4 of 7

¶7In the case on hand, initially, the first respondent vide proceedings dated 19.03.2024, re-classified the S.Nos.397/1A and 397/1B as Tharisu land from patta land. In regard to S.No.397/1A, it belongs to one Mr.Thavarajan and as far as S.No.397/1B is concerned, it belongs to the petitioner. This being the case, as against the proceedings of the first respondent dated 19.03.2024, the said Mr.Thavarajan preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Land Reforms, who in turn vide proceedings dated 29.07.2025 directed the revenue officials to re-classify the land in S.No.397/1A. Accordingly, the District Revenue Officer vide proceedings dated 15.09.2025 directed the third respondent herein to reclassify the land in S.No.397/1A as patta land from Tharisu land and issue patta to the said Mr.Thavarajan.

¶8In view of the above, it is clear and evident that the case of Mr.Thavarajan is squarely applicable to S.No.397/1B, which was erroneously reclassified as Tharisu land from patta land. Therefore, instead of directing the parties concerned to approach the Commissioner of Land Administration by challenging the order of the first respondent dated 19.03.2024, this Court feels it would be appropriate to remit back the matter to the respondents for fresh consideration. Page5 of 7

¶9Accordingly, this issues the following directions:

(i) The proceedings of the first respondent dated 19.03.2024 is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the respondents for fresh consideration and for re-classification of the land in S.No.397/1B as patta land from Tharisu land and issue patta in accordance with law.

(ii) While considering the matter afresh, this Court directs the respondents to consider the issue on par with the issue of the land owner Mr.Thavarajan in S.No.397/1A.

(iii) The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of sixteen

(16) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid observation and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 08-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VM To:

¶1The District Collector Thiruvallur District Chinna Ekkadu, Jaya Nagar Thiruvallur, Tamil Nadu 602 001. Page6 of 7

¶2The Revenue Divisional Officer, Bharathiyar St, Sp Nagar, Thiruvallur Kakkalur, Tamilnadu 602 003.

¶3The Thasildar, Jn Road, Nh 716, Thiruvallur, Tamil Nadu. WPoNo.o13730oofo2024 KRISHNANoRAMASAMYoJ. VM WPoNo.o13730oofo2024 08-04-2026 Page7oofo7

Page1 of 7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY and WMP Nos.14892 & 14894 of 2024 1. Nalina Ramachandran 2. M/s P.S. Construction Private Limited Rep By Its Director Nalina Ramachandran, Having Registered Office A Plot No. 13 1st Main Road, Olympic Colony Padi, Chennai 600 050. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The District Collector Thiruvallur District, Chinna Ekkadu, Jaya Nagar Thiruvallur, Tamil Nadu 602 001. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Bharathiyar St, Sp Nagar, Thiruvallur Kakkalur, Tamilnadu 602 003. 3. The Thasildar Jn Road, Nh 716, Thiruvallur, Tamil Nadu. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the record of the 1st Respondent in Na.Ka.No.353311/2023/N1, dated 19.03.2024 and quash the same. For Petitioner(s): Mr.Mohammed Fayaz Ali For Respondent(s): Mr.C.Gowthamaraj, GA Page2 of 7