S.Sakkarai, v. The Tahsildhar,

Order (RSO-31)

1.G.O.210 Revenue SS(II) Dept. dated:

08.07.2011

2.G.O.303 Revenue SS(II) dated:

27.12.2016 ISD-Tahsildar NISD-Zonal Deputy Tahsildar ISD-30 days NISD-15 days By the way of inheritance (by submitting Legal Heir Certificate, Death Certificate, Patta copy) Revenue Standing Order (RSO-31) I.G.O.210 Revenue SS(II) Dept. dated:

08.07.2011 NISD-Zonal Deputy Tahsildar NISD-15 days F-Line application (Field line Measurement) Chain Survey and Land Records Manual-Part-II (page no.13) Based on Announceme nt No.7 Dated:

24.09.2021 Tahsildar 90 days from the date of payment for measurement of land (This office Circular Q5/20403/20 20 dated:

15.03.2021 Workflow OPT-ISD (Field Visit) (Scrutiny) (2nd verifier) Approver Applications received from Taluk office

(CSC) or SRO FirkaSurveyor Land Records Draughtsman

(LRD) Deputy Inspector of Survey (DIS) Tahsildar Workflow OPT-NISD Recommend Approver

Appeal for patta transfer application As per rule Revenue Standing Order (RSO) 31, authority to issue final order for patta transfer application is given to Tahsildar. Revenue Divisional officer can issue order for changes / corrections in patta transfer application by getting remarks from Tahsildar / Surveyor / DIS and issue final order. Applications received from Taluk office

(CSC) or SRO Village Administrative Office (VAO) Zonal Deputy Tahsildar

¶23Online Patta Transfer (OPT) involving subdivisions are dealt with by the competent authorities by following the procedures. Applications submitted by the persons are received from Taluk Office and based on the applications, field inspections are conducted by the Frika Surveyor and the Land Records Draughtsman scrutinises the applications, which are to be verified by the Deputy Inspector of Survey. The final decision is taken by the Tahsildar holding jurisdiction, who passes an order. During the process of deciding the applications, it must be ensured that such applications submitted by the persons, which are falling under the provisions of the Act alone is dealt with and if it is found that there is a dispute between the parties regarding title, ownership or boundary, then it is preferable that the parties are relegated to the Civil Court of Law instead of unsettling the issues between the parties.

¶24The scope of the Act is to be now understood and interpreted with reference to the present day situation, since the Department is in the process of maintenance of survey records and revenue records. The Act originally intended to settle the survey and boundaries and the said processes had already been concluded long back and therefore, the authorities are expected to keep in mind that those settled boundaries cannot be unsettled by conducting survey. They are in the process of maintaining the survey records and to that extent the applications are to be entertained and in respect of other disputes no applications under the provisions of the Act can be entertained and the parties are to be relegated to the Civil Court of Law.

¶25A distinction is to be drawn with reference to the survey and boundaries of lands in pre-independence and pre-constitutional era and with reference to the present day context, where the survey and boundaries were already beeen concluded on account of the fact that 100 years had lapsed, since the commencement and enforcement of the Act.

¶26Regarding Online Patta Transfer (OPT) and Non Involving Sub Divisions, the authorities on receipt of applications from the individuals are referring to the Village Administrative Officer for conducting field inspection and recommendations and thereafter, the zonal Deputy Tahsildar has got powers to prove the same. Such procedures are followed for issuing Online Patta Transfer where sub divisions are not involved.

¶27Based on the orders of this Court passed par in the writ petitions, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.370, Revenue and Disaster Management Department dated 21.07.2020.

¶28The learned Additional Government Pleader brought to the notice of this Court that such procedures are comprehensive in nature and the authorities are bound to follow the same and in the event of lapses, negligence, dereliction of duty, the Government order itself stipulates initiation of Departmental proceedings against such officials and in the event of any corrupt practices, vigilance actions are also to be initiated based on the guidelines issued by the Government.

¶29In respect of these guidelines several applications / cases are filed and therefore, the respondents are bound to look into lapses, negligence or dereliction of duty and also the corrupt practices prevailing at the field level while processing the application and initiate effective and efficient steps to ensure that the applications submitted are dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the Act, without any violation or deviations. The authorities in this regard are to be sensitised by conducting review meetings or otherwise and ensure that violations are viewed seriously.

¶30In view of the fact that all these writ petitions are filed seeking a direction for disposal of the representation to conduct survey and fix the boundary or not to conduct survey and fix boundaries or otherwise, The Government has already issued guidelines in this regard. Thus, no further consideration is required.

¶31The persons submitting an application must be provided with information about the seniority of the application and such procedure must be followed. The authorities, on receipt of any application, shall register the same in a register to be maintained in every survey office and the seniority number of the application is to be communicated to the person concerned. Thereafter, such applications are to be taken into consideration in accordance with the seniority and orders are to be passed by following the procedures strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

¶32The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents brought to the notice of this Court that such a procedure has already been followed by the authorities. Thus, submitting an application and immediately filing a writ petition without providing an opportunity to the authorities to consider the same, at no circumstances be encouraged by the High Court.

¶33In the event of issuing a direction to consider the representation or to conduct a survey, the other aggrieved persons, who all are waiting for long years would be prejudiced and such a situation would arise only if an order from the High Court is obtained, then alone the survey is to be conducted and not otherwise. All such applications filed by the aggrieved persons are to be dealt with uniformly, consistently and by following the seniority and by obtaining an order of direction from the High Court to dispose of the representation. The right of other aggrieved persons cannot be deprived nor may they be prejudiced otherwise. In the event of any urgency or otherwise, reasons must be recorded by the authorities for over-looking the seniority. In all other circumstances, the seniority of the applications would be followed scrupulously for the purpose of considering the same without causing prejudice to any of the aggrieved persons, since all the aggrieved persons, who all are waiting and longing to secure relief from the Government authorities are to be treated equally without any discrimination.

¶34The power of judicial review of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to ensure that the processes through which a decision is taken by the competent authorities is in consonance with the Statutes and Rules in force, but not the decision itself. Therefore, High Court in writ proceedings cannot conduct a roving enquiry with reference to the grounds raised between the parties regarding title, ownership, civil rights or otherwise. Thus, the orders passed in some of the writ petitions directing the competent authorities to relegate the parties to the Civil Court is to be followed and all such parties are at liberty to approach the competent Civil Court of law.

¶35The petitioners have raised a submission that in the event of boundary dispute, the parties have to approach the Surveyor and only thereafter, they will have to go under Section 14 of the Act for approaching the Civil Court. Such a submission is based on misconceptions. The very purpose and object of the pre-independence Act enacted in the year 1923 now cannot be interpreted for the purpose of resolving the boundary dispute between the parties. Filing an application under the Survey and Boundaries Act is an option for a person, if there is any deviation or difference or the dispute is falling within the ambit of provisions of the Act. In all other circumstances, any person having dispute over the boundary, title, ownership or otherwise is at liberty to approach the Civil Court.

¶36Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure unambiguously contemplates that "The Courts shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred".

¶37Therefore, a special enactment has no relevance with reference to a right of the parties to approach the competent Civil Court of law to resolve all nature of civil disputes including boundary dispute, survey dispute, title dispute, ownership or otherwise. Therefore, neither the parties nor the authorities need to create an impression that in the event of boundary dispute, the parties have to approach the authorities at the first instance. It is not required that the aggrieved persons, in the event of boundary dispute has to approach the authorities for fixing the boundary, they are at liberty to approach the Civil Court of law under Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which is unambiguous in this regard.

¶38Submitting an application for fixing boundary is an option available to the aggrieved persons. Once an application is filed, whether the application is entertainable under the provisions of the Act is to be determined by the authorities and only if it is falling within the ambit of the Act, then alone the survey or fixing of boundary is to be undertaken. Even in this case, the authorities are bound to relegate the parties to the competent Civil Court of law under Section 14 of the Act.

¶39It is contended by the petitioner that the authorities are making certain findings regarding the title, ownership in their order, while rejecting the applications. Such findings made by the authorities either in the patta proceedings or in the proceedings under the Survey and Boundaries Act are restricted and to be understood only for the purpose of arriving a conclusion under the provisions of the Act and the said patta proceedings or the proceedings under the Survey and Boundaries Act would not confer any title or be taken as a conclusive decision, more specifically under Section 35 of the Evidence Act.

¶40Accordingly, the respondents are directed to consider the representations / applications submitted by the petitioners in the order of seniority and by following the procedures as contemplated under the Governmental orders and in consonance with the provisions of the Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. Wherever the applications are already disposed of and appeals provided under the Act has been filed, then such appeals are to be decided on merits and in consonance with the provisions of the Survey and Boundaries Act.

¶41In cases, where the authorities have already rejected an application for conducting survey or to fix boundary and has relegated the parties to the Civil Court of law to resolve their issues, all such parties are at liberty to approach the Competent Civil Court of Law, by impleading all the necessary parties for the purpose of adjudication of issues to establish their civil rights.

¶42The respondents are directed to ensure that unnecessary and frivolous applications to conduct survey or to fix boundary are not entertained in violations of the provisions of the act or in violation of the guidelines issued by the Government. In all such cases, actions are to be initiated against such officials under the provisions of the Service Rules for lapses, negligence or dereliction of duty.

¶43In the writ petitions, where any one of the parties has instituted Civil Suit, which is pending before the competent Civil Court of law, then the revenue authorities / survey authorities are not empowered to decide the issues and the parties are bound to resolve the issues before the competent Civil Court of law and thereafter approach the revenue authorities competent for the purpose of grant of patta or to fix boundary or otherwise.

¶44With the above observations, all the writ petitions are disposed of. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to cost.

19.06.2023 Jeni Index : Yes Speaking order To

1.The Tahsildhar Dharmapuri Taluk Dharmapuri District.

2.The Taluk Surveyor Dharmapuri Taluk Dharmapuri District.

3.The Village Administrative Officer Sidhankotti Village Kuppur Post Dharmapuri Taluk Dharmapuri District.

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. Jeni

19.06.2023

W.P.No.37519oofo2016o&oetc., INoTHEoHIGHoCOURToOFoJUDICATUREoAToMADRAS DATEDoo:o19.06.2023 CORAM THEoHONOURABLEoMR.JUSTICEoS.M.SUBRAMANIAM oWo .P.Nos.37519oofo2016,o6oo313,o14434,o18454,o18977,o25404,o33410,o 33688,o33834,o34398o&o34875oofo2018,o20823oofo2019,o3250o&o3728oofo 2020,o34003,o34005,o34702,o34739o&o34983oofo2022,o21,o776,o2733,o2926,o 2989,o3131,o5612,o5680,o12267,o12503,oo12572,o12606,o12637,o12672,o12739,o 12814,o12816,o12961,o13032,o13232,o13236,o13285,o13303,o13318,o13322,o 13358,o13365,o13467,o13776,o13851,o13919,o13929,o14016,o14082,o14089,o 14107,o14112,o14121,14488,o14493,o14494,o14495,o14497otoo14505,o14507,o 14508,o14509,o14510,o14511,o14514,o14548,o14551,o14555,o14558,o14563,o 14633,o14638,o14639,o14640,o14641,o14644,o14749,o15919,o15997,o15998,o 16420,o16543,o16558,o16628,o16741,o16743,o16845,o17055,o17095,o17203,o 17450,o17231,o17738,o17865o&o17969oofo2023 and oWo .M.P.Nos.2oo0352oofo2017,o7806,o7807,o17050,o21764,o21765,o22379,o 29565,o39300o&o39972oofo2018,oo2599o&o20022oofo2019,o34158 ofo2022,o9,o3026,o3094,o15846,o13023,o13718,o13720,o13981, 13984otoo14000,o14024,o14029,o14031,o14032,o14040, 14114,o14120,o14122,o14124,o14125,o14127, 15797,o16598o&o16837oofo2023 W.P.No.37519oofo2016: S.Sakkarai ...ooPetitioner oooo ooooooooVs. 1.TheoTahsildhar oooDharmapurioTaluk oooDharmapurioDistrict. Pageo1oofo27 2.The Taluk Surveyor Dharmapuri Taluk Dharmapuri District. 3.The Village Administrative Officer Sidhankotti Village Kuppur Post Dharmapuri Taluk Dharmapuri District. 4.Sakthi 5.Veeramani 6.Munuswamy ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 19.09.2016 by taking action to measure the lands i.e., 0.05 Ares in S.No.229/5, 0.06 Ares in S.No.229/6, 0.10 Ares in S.No.229/9, 0.16 Ares in S.No.229/11 and 0.02 Ares in S.No.229/2 of Chithankottai Village, Dharmapuri Taluk and District. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Ilaya Perumal For R1 to R3 : Mr.J.Ravindran Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.T.Arun Kumar Additional Government Pleader For R4 to R6 : No Appearance COMMON ORDER All these batch of writ petitions are instituted mainly for the relief of directing the respondents to survey the land belonging to the petitioners or raising certain objections to survey the land belonging to the contesting parties or to measure the other lands and fix the boundaries. 2. Several writ petitions are filed to direct the official respondents to survey the land and fix the boundaries by invoking the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923. Issuing a direction, either to consider the representation submitted by the petitioners or to direct the authorities to conduct survey of the land belonging to the any one of the parties would create further dispute amongst the parties. Such directions without adjudication on merits would do no service to the cause of justice and either of the parties will be back again to the High Court by way of another writ petition and it ends in multiplicity of litigations by not resolving the issues between the parties. Thus, the practice of issuing a direction to dispose of the representation to survey the land or a direction to survey the land without adjudication on merits is not desirable at all circumstances. 3. All these writ petitions are filed either seeking a direction to consider the representation or to conduct survey or not to conduct survey or to conduct re-survey or otherwise. This being the relief sought for, issuing directions without adjudication on merits are causing prejudice to any one of the parties and therefore, this Court thought fit to consider the scope of the Tamil Nadu Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 so as to understand pre- constitutional situation that was prevailing and post-constitutional changes and developments that has occurred. That apart, the context, purpose and objec