Writ Petition No. 1727 of 1977
The High Court of Judicature at Madras, in Writ Petition No. 1727 of 1977 dated 6 August 1979, set aside the Government of Tamil Nadu, Revenue Department, G.O.Ms. No. 100 dated 18 January 1977 because K. Paramasivam had not been given an opportunity to be heard. The High Court returned the matter to the Government of Tamil Nadu for fresh consideration after hearing him.
What the petition concerns
Writ Petition No. 1727 of 1977 concerns the assignment of surplus land taken over under the Land Ceiling Act. K. Paramasivam asked the High Court of Judicature at Madras to quash the Government of Tamil Nadu, Revenue Department, G.O.Ms. No. 100 dated 18 January 1977.
The land involved was 1 acre and 55 cents in Survey No. 195/7 of Sirupakkam Village, Vridhachalam Taluk. The Authorised Officer had assigned the land on 18 April 1971 under the surplus land assignment scheme.
Proceedings before the revenue authorities
The dispute passed through several administrative stages:
- M. Ramasamy Naicker appealed against the assignment to the District Revenue Officer, South Arcot at Cuddalore.
- The District Revenue Officer dismissed the appeal through order No. Rc. D1/72363/71 dated 22 July 1972.
- M. Ramasamy Naicker then filed a revision petition under rule 10 before the Board of Revenue.
- The Board of Revenue fixed a hearing for 18 May 1974. According to K. Paramasivam, the revision was dismissed because M. Ramasamy Naicker did not participate.
- M. Ramasamy Naicker filed a further revision before the Government of Tamil Nadu.
- The Government concluded that the revision should have been decided on its merits rather than dismissed for non-participation, and returned the matter to the Board of Revenue.
High Court decision
The High Court of Judicature at Madras found that K. Paramasivam had not been given an opportunity to be heard before the Government set aside the Board of Revenue decision and returned the matter. Counsel for both sides agreed that notice should have been given to him.
The High Court therefore:
- set aside G.O.Ms. No. 100 dated 18 January 1977;
- returned the matter to the Government of Tamil Nadu for fresh consideration;
- required K. Paramasivam to be given an opportunity to be heard; and
- directed each party to bear its own costs.
Who is affected
Writ Petition No. 1727 of 1977 directly affects K. Paramasivam, M. Ramasamy Naicker, the Board of Revenue represented by the Commissioner of Land Reforms, and the Government of Tamil Nadu represented by the Secretary, Revenue Department. The High Court did not finally decide who was entitled to the land. It required the Government to reconsider the matter after hearing K. Paramasivam.
This summary is generated from the source document to help you find what is relevant. The PDF above is authoritative. For advice on your own property, use LandLens One or speak to a qualified professional.
Common questions
Did the High Court cancel the land assignment?
The High Court set aside G.O.Ms. No. 100 dated 18 January 1977 and returned the matter to the Government of Tamil Nadu. It did not make a final decision on entitlement to the land.
Why was the government decision set aside?
K. Paramasivam had not been given an opportunity to be heard before the Government set aside the Board of Revenue decision and returned the matter. The High Court found that complaint to be well-founded.
What land was involved in the dispute?
The dispute concerned 1 acre and 55 cents in Survey No. 195/7 of Sirupakkam Village, Vridhachalam Taluk, assigned under the surplus land assignment scheme.
What was the Government required to do next?
The Government of Tamil Nadu was required to reconsider the matter after giving K. Paramasivam an opportunity to be heard.
