Sivasanmugam v. The District Collector

though the petitioner's application for assignment of free patta has been rejected in respect of 6 cents of land, situated at Punjaithalaiyur Village, the second respondent will reconsider the issue with regard to grant of patta in respect of 3 cents of land and hence the writ petition was adjourned to 17.11.2022. Thereafter, after some adjournments, the writ petition is listed today (30.11.2022). 4.Today (30.11.2022), when the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, produced a copy of the order dated 09.11.2022 made in Na.Ka.3758/2020/Aa2 passed by the second respondent, rejecting the petitioner's request on the ground that free house site patta cannot be granted to the Government Natham Poramboke vacant land. He also produced a copy of the communication dated 23.11.2022 sent by the second respondent to the Government Pleader, wherein, it is stated that the petitioner has been advised to submit application and relevant documents for considering his request for patta and further stated that on the petitioner submitting the relevant documents, his requisition for issuance of patta will be re-considered as per the Government Rules.

3/10

5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the classification Government Natham Poramboke is un-known to the legal terms and the issue involved in this writ petition has already been decided by this Court in the decision reported in 2013 - 4 L.W. 76 (A.R.Meenakshi and others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and others), wherein, it is observed that poramboke does not include natham and grama natham never vest with the Government and has held that a land could either be a village natham or a Government poramboke or a privately owned land and further submitted that a person occupying natham land is entitled for patta and hence, the petitioner is entitled for grant of patta.

6.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the Natham Settlement Scheme in Punjaithalaiyur Village of Dharapuram Taluk was implemented and completed in the year 1996 and natham patta was issued for each and every dwelling house owners by the Natham Settlement Thasildar appointed by the Government for the above Scheme and during the process, S.Nos.905/17 and 905/18 were classified as Government

4/10

Poramboke Vacant Site and the petitioner has purchased the property during the year 2013 and hence, the petitioner's claim for patta need not be entertained.

7.Heard the arguments advanced on either side and perused the materials available on record.

8.For better appreciation, the relevant portion of the decision of this Court reported in 2013 - 4 L.W. 76 (A.R.Meenakshi and others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and others), is extracted hereunder:

"21. In Muthammal Vs. State of Tamilnadu [2006 (3) LW 361], the exposition of what a poramboke land is and what a gramanatham is, as presented by Mr.T.R.Mani, learned counsel was extracted by S.Ashok Kumar,J in paragraph 8 as follows :

"Learned Senior Counsel also clarified that in Natham, first occupier will be treated as the owner and no patta will be given to them. Patta is issued only for assessed lands and it is the settled law. That is why, Natham is called as Poramboke i.e.,

5/10

"natham poramboke" which means "poram (g[w[ k); " is outside; "poke (nghfF; )" is revenue record. Thus the word

"poramboke lands" means the lands which is not assessed to revenue records and it is outside the revenue accounts. Likewise,

"gramanatham" is defined in the Law Lexicon as "ground set apart on which the house of village may be built". Similarly, Natham land is described in Tamil Lexicon published under the authority of University of Madras to the effect that it is a residential portion of a village; or portion of a village inhabited by the non brahmins; or land reserved as house sites; etc., Learned senior counsel also relied on very many decisions of this High Court as well as the Apex Court to the effect that Poramboke does not include natham and grama natham never vest with the Government, which will be referred to in the latter part of this judgment."

24. But unfortunately, overlooking all the above documents, the District Collector has passed the impugned order branding the land as a pattina natham. There is no classification

6/10

known as pattina natham anywhere in the Madras Presidency or in the Provinces. I do not know wherefrom the District Collector invented such a new classification, which had never existed. A land could either be a village natham or a Government poramboke or a privately owned land. No land is classified as pattina natham. Therefore, the impugned order is obviously erroneous and is liable to be set aside.

25. The impugned order also shows total lack of application of mind. In the last but two paragraphs of the impugned order, the District Collector has used the expressions

"Government poramboke" and "gramanatham" as synonyms. But they are not. After using the expressions "Government poramboke" and

"gramanatham" as synonyms, the District Collector has relied upon the entry in the adangal as though it is a pattina natham. Thus, the District Collector used all expressions together very loosely." 9.The decision cited supra makes it clear that poramboke land does not include natham and grama natham never vest with the

7/10

Government and it is a residential portion of a village. 10.A land could either be a Village natham or a Government poramboke or a privately owned land and no land is classified as Government Natham Poramboke. However, the second respondent without understanding the legal provision, mechanically passed the rejection order dated 09.11.2022 on the ground that free house site patta cannot be granted to the Government Natham Poramboke vacant land.

11.In view of the above, though the order dated 09.11.2022 made in Na.Ka.3758/2020/Aa2 was passed by the second respondent after filing of this writ petition, the same is set aside. The respondents are directed to issue patta to the petitioner in respect of 6 cents of land in S.Nos.905/17 and 905/18 situated at Punjaithalaiyur Village, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

12.The writ petition is allowed. No costs.

30.11.2022

pri

8/10

Speaking Order/ Non Speaking Order Index: Yes/ No Internet: Yes/ No To

1.The District Collector, Tiruppur District,

Tiruppur.

2.The Tahsildhar

Dharapuram Taluk,

Tiruppur District.

9/10

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

pri

30.11.2022

10/10

11/10