High Court · 2025

W.A.No.1655 of 2021IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 23.09.2025CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAMANDTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQW.A.No.1655 of 2021and C.M.P.No.10450 of 20211. N.Mohan S/o.Narayanasamy2. N.Kandasamy, S/o.Narayanasamy ... AppellantsVs.1. Basheer @ Abdul Basheer, S/o.Late C.A.Khabeer2.Shayeedha @ Shaidunnissa D/o.Late C.A.Khabeer3. Abidha Begauam @ Abiduninsa, D/o.Late C.A.Khabeer4. Rasheeda @ Raseedunnisa, D/o.Late C.A.Khabeer5. Nasirabegam, D/o.Late C.A.Khabeer6. Mohamed Zaheer, S/o.Late C.A.KhabeerPage Nos.1/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1655 of 20217. K.Mohamed Ariff, S/o.Late C.A.Khabeer8. Nafeesa Begum, D/o.Late C.A.Khabeer Petitioners 1 to 8 are represented by their Power Agent K.Anitha No.29, Maralikrishnan Nagar Valasaravakkam Chennai - 600 0879. The District Collector, Chengalpattu District, (formerly Kanchipuram District), Chengalpattu District.10. The District Revenue Officer, Chengalpattu District, (formerly Kanchipuram District), Chengalpattu.11. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengalpattu Region, (formerly Kanchipuram District), Chengalpattu.12. The Tahsildar, Thiruporur Taluk, Chengalpattu District.13. The Superintendent of Police, Anti Land Grabbing Cell, Kanchipuram District.14. The Sub-Inspector of Police, ALGC, Kanchipuram District.15. The Inspector of Police, E-8, Kelambakkam Police Station,Page Nos.2/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1655 of 2021 Chengalpattu District.16. Muktharunnisa, W/o.Late C.A.Malick17. Bilal, S/o.Late. C.A.Malick18. Mohammed Jalal, S/o.Late C.A.Malick19. Fathika Banu, D/o.Late C.A.Malick20. Saraunissa @ Saru Begum D/o.Late C.Hussain Basha21. Tasimunisa, @ Tasleem, D/o.Late C.Hussain Basha22. Sheerin Mustaq, S/o.Late Azmath Basha23. Mohamed Mustaq, S/o.Late Azmath Basha24. Mohamed Ejaz, S/o.Late Azmath Basha25. Thahasin Sulthana, D/o.Late Azmath Basha26. Nasemunisa @ Naseema Beguam, D/o.Late C.Hussain Basha27. Adhilaunisa @ Aadhhila Begam D/o.Late Hussain Basha28. Farook Basha @ Parubhasha, D/o. Late C.Hussain Basha29. Afsarunisa @ Apsar Fathima, D/o.Late C.Hussain BashaPage Nos.3/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1655 of 202130. Hilalunisa @ Hilal Fathima, D/o.Late C.Hussain Basha31. Mohamed Siddique @ Siddique Basha S/o.Late C.Hussain Basha32. Mrs.Mehrunnisa W/o.Late C.M.S.Hyath Basha ... RespondentsPrayer:Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent praying to set aside the order dated 29.09.2020 passed in W.P.No.12800 of 2020.For Appellant: Mr.K.MahalingamFor Respondents: Mr.Saaisudharsan Sathiyamoorthy [R5] (Change of vakalat not filed) Mr.Vadivelu Deenadayalan Additional Govt.Pleader [R9 to R15] No appearance [RR1to 4, 6 to 8and 16 to 31] Mr.S.Vijayakumar [R32]J U D G M E N T(Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM.J.,)The present intra-court appeal has been instituted to assail the writ order dated 29.09.2020 passed in W.P.No.12800 of 2020.Page Nos.4/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1655 of 20212. Respondent Nos.25 and 26 in the writ petition are the appellants in the present writ appeal. Respondents 1 to 8 filed the writ petition challenging the enquiry call notice dated 19.11.2019 issued by the District Revenue Officer, Kancheepuram (presently Chengalpettu) asking the parties to appear for an enquiry along with their explanations and documents, if any. Instead of appearing before the District Revenue Officer and defend their respective cases, Respondents 1 to 8 herein have chosen to file the writ petition mainly on the ground that several suits and patta proceedings have already been dealt with by the Authorities and their rights are decided and thus, the enquiry call notice is unnecessary. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant in the present case would submit that the rights of the appellants have already been crystallized and therefore, the observations and directions issued in the writ order impugned would affect the civil rights of the appellants.4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of fifth respondent would contend that the appellants have no right over Page Nos.5/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1655 of 2021the property and therefore, the writ petition has been instituted challenging the enquiry call notice. 5. The learned Government Pleader would submit that in the present case, the writ petition has been instituted challenging the enquiry call notice, but the Authorities have not been allowed to conduct an enquiry. Only after conducting a thorough enquiry, the Authorities will be in a position to take a decision and pass appropriate orders. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 7. No writ against enquiry call notice is maintainable unless such notice has been issued by an incompetent authority having no jurisdiction or tainted with allegations of malafides. In respect of patta proceedings under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Patta Passbook Act, 1983, an enquiry is to be conducted to ascertain whether the applicant is owner or otherwise for the purpose of grant of patta, cancellation of patta or to mutate the revenue records, as the case may be.8. However, the Revenue Authorities cannot decide the title or ownership based on the documents. In the event of any dispute regarding title or ownership, the Revenue Authorities are bound to Page Nos.6/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1655 of 2021relegate the parties to approach the competent civil Court of law for the purpose of determining the issue and to establish their civil rights. 9. Therefore, the enquiry / adjudication under the provisions of the Patta Passbook Act and the Rules framed thereunder by the Revenue Authorities are limited and they cannot adjudicate the civil rights between the parties. They are bound to verify the documents, form an opinion and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. In the event of any dispute or doubt regarding title, the patta cannot be issued in view of Section 3 of Patta Passbook Act. Rule 4 of the Tamil Nadu Patta Passbook Rules provides for procedure on receipt of application or information. Rule 4 (4) of Patta Passbook Rules reads as under: "4 (4) In the event of the Tahsildar being satisfied that a dispute concerning ownership of patta is already pending in a Court or issues are raised before him which impringe on personal laws or laws of succession and all the parties interested do not agree on the ownership in writing, he shall direct the concerned parties to obtain order on the ownership from a competent Civil Court having jurisdiction before changing the entries as already recorded and existing in the various revenue records."Page Nos.7/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1655 of 202110. In the present case, several applications have been filed, orders are passed by the Courts also. Thus, the District Revenue Officer is bound to consider all the documents produced by the parties and take a decision independently and uninfluenced by any of the observations made in any of the Court orders regarding the patta proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Patta Passbook Act and the Rules framed thereunder. If any Civil Court judgment and decree are produced, those judgment and decree are to be taken into consideration for the purpose of determining the title or ownership between the parties.11. As far as the writ Court orders and writ appeal orders relating to patta proceedings are concerned, those observations need not be taken into consideration for the purpose of title / ownership.12. The writ Court is not expected to decide the disputed issues of civil nature. Such issues are to be decided in a trial nature proceedings by the competent civil Court. If those issues have already been decided by the Civil Court and if any judgments are produced, those judgments is to be taken into consideration by the District Revenue Officer for the purpose of considering the Page Nos.8/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1655 of 2021application. At the outset, the District Revenue Officer shall independently conduct an enquiry by affording opportunity to all the parties and other interested parties approaching the District Revenue Officer to participate in the enquiry proceedings and conduct an enquiry and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above modification, the writ Court order is set aside and the writ appeal stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. [S.M.S., J.] [M.S.Q, J.] 23.09.2025Speaking orderIndex : YesNeutral Citation : YesgpaPage Nos.9/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1655 of 2021To1. The District Collector, Chengalpattu District, (formerly Kanchipuram District), Chengalpattu District.2. The District Revenue Officer, Chengalpattu District, (formerly Kanchipuram District), Chengalpattu.3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengalpattu Region, (formerly Kanchipuram District), Chengalpattu.4. The Tahsildar, Thiruporur Taluk, Chengalpattu District.5. The Superintendent of Police, Anti Land Grabbing Cell, Kanchipuram District.6. The Sub-Inspector of Police, ALGC, Kanchipuram District.7. The Inspector of Police, E-8, Kelambakkam Police Station, Chengalpattu District.Page Nos.10/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1655 of 2021S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.andMOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.gpaW.A.No.1655 of 202123.09.2025Page Nos.11/11