Madras High Court
N. Karthikeyan vs The Inspector General Of Registration on 19 August, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2019 MAD 1451
Bench: S.Manikumar, Subramonium Prasad
W.P.No.24344 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 19/8/2019
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Writ Petition No.24344 of 2019
N. Karthikeyan ... Petitioner
Vs
1. The Inspector General of Registration
100 Santhome High Road
Chennai 600 028.
2. The District Collector
Erode District
Collectorate
Erode 638 011.
3. The District Registrar (Administration)
O/o. The District Registrar
Erode.
4. The Sub-Registrar
O/o. The Sub-Registrar
Thingalur 638 055.
5. The Tahsildar
Perundurai Taluk
Perundurai
Erode 638 052. ... Respondents
1/14
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.24344 of 2019
Prayer Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for
the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the
second respondent in Na.Ka.No.25558/2015/U4, dated 23/1/2017 and quash
the same and consequently, direct the respondents to construct Thingalur Sub-
Registrar's Office in S.No.309/12, Kasukaran Palayam Village, Erode District, as
originally contemplated in the proceeding of the second respondent in
Na.Ka.25558/2012/U4, dated 26/9/2012.
For petitioner ... Mr.B.Pachiyappan
for Mr.T.Gowthaman
For respondents ... Mr.T.M.Pappiah
Special Government Pleader
for R.R.1, 3 and 4.
Mr.Akhil Akbar Ali
Government Advocate
for R.R.2 and 5.
------
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.Manikumar,J) Claiming himself to be a public interest litigant, Mr.N.Karthikeyan, has filed the instant writ petition, to call for the records of the District Collector, Erode District, Erode, second respondent, in Na.Ka.No.25558/2015/U4, dated 23/1/2017 and quash the same. Petitioner has also sought for a direction to the respondents, to construct Thingalur Sub-Registrar Office, in S.No.309/12, 2/14 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.24344 of 2019 Kasukaran Palayam Village, Erode District, as originally contemplated in the proceeding of the District Collector, second respondent, in Na.Ka.No.25558/2012/U4, dated 26/9/2012.
2. Supporting the prayer sought for, petitioner has stated that originally, one Mr.T.P.Subramani, has offered his land for construction of Sub- Registrar's Office, at Thingalur Village, in S.No.309/9. Subsequently, S.No.309/9 was sub-divided as 309/12 and ear-marked for construction of Sub- Registrar's Office, at Thingalur. When the said construction did not take place, Mr.T.P.Subramani, filed W.P.No.31443 of 2012, and the same was withdrawn. Contending that construction of Sub-Registrar's office in Kasukaran Palayam, Thingalur Village, would enable the public to have access to the said office, instant writ petition is filed for the relief, as stated supra.
3. Mr.E.Manoharan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai; District Registrar (Administration), Erode and Sub-Registrar, Thingalur, respondents 1, 3 and 4 respectively, submitted that orders have been issued, for construction of Sub- Registrar's office, in re-survey No.55, Sungakaranpalayam Village, vide, proceedings in R.C.No.36655/16/U4, dated 11/6/2018. 3/14 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.24344 of 2019
4. Mr.Akhil Akbar Ali, learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the District Collector, Erode and Tahsildar, Perundurai Taluk, Erode, respondents 2 and 4 respectively.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials available on record.
6. Proceeding of the District Collector, in R.C.No.36655/16/U4, dated 11/6/2018, District Collector, Erode, granting permission for construction of the Office of the Sub-Registrar at re-survey No.55/2, is extracted hereunder:-
<nuhL khtl;l Ml;rpj;jiyth; mth;fspd; bray;Kiwfs;
gpwg;gpg;gth; : lhf;lh;/v!;/gpughfh;. ,/M/g/.
e/f/36655-2016-c4 ehs; 11/6/2018 bghUs; : epykhw;wk;?<nuhL khtl;lk;?bgUe;Jiw tl;lk; ? R';ffhud;ghisak; fpuhkk; ? g[y vz; 55?y; 0/03/71 bcwf;nlh; (4000 rJuo) epyk; ? jp'f; S:h; rhh; gjpthsh; mYtyf fl;olk; fl;l gjpt[j;Jiwf;F Kd;EiHt[ mDkjp tH';fp cj;jutplg;gLfpwJ/ ghh;it : 1/ khtl;l gjpthsh; (epht ; hfk;) (c/g/J/j/epiy) (T/bgh/) <nuhL. foj e/f/2530-M2- 2012- ehs; 26/12/2016/ 2/cjtp nfhl;l bghwpahsh; beL";rhiy Jiw f(k)g foj vz;/31-2018-,t/m-ehs; 07/06/2018/ 3/bgUe;Jiw tl;lhl;rpahpd; e/f/9423-2011-m5 ehs; 07/06/2018/ 4/<nuhL tUtha; nfhl;lhrpahpd; e/f/3044-2018-M1 ehs; 08/06/2018/ 4/14 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.24344 of 2019 Miz <nuhL khtl;lk;. bgUe;Jiw tl;lk;. R';ff;fhud;ghisak; fpuhkk;. g[y vz;/55 rhiy g[wk;nghf;fpy; 0/31/0 bcwf;nlh; epyj;jpy; 0/03/71 bcwf;nlh; (4000 rJuo) epyk; jp';fS:h; rhh;gjpthsh; mYtyf fl;olk; fl;l gjpt[ Jiwf;F Kd; EiHt[ mDkjp tH';FtJ bjhlh;ghf rhh;epiy mYtyh;fspd; mwpf;ifapd; nghpy; gpd;tUkhW cj;jutplg;gLfpwJ/ epyj;jpd; tifghL kw;Wk; gug;gst[ <nuhL khtl;lk;. bgUe;Jiw tl;lk;. R';ff;fhud;ghisak; fpuhkk;. g[y vz;/55?y; 0/31/0 bcwf;nlh; epyk; rhiy g[wk;nghf;F vd fpuhkf; fzf;Ffspy; jhf;fyhfpa[s;sJ/ :"m1" tpsk;guk;
bgUe;Jiw tl;lk;. R';ff;fhud;ghisak; fpuhkk;. g[y vz;/55?y; 0/03/71 bcwf;nlh; (4000 rJuo) epyj;jpy; jp'f; S:h; rhh;gjpthsh; mYtyf fl;olk; fl;l Kd;EiHt[ mDkjp tH';Fk;
bghUl;L fle;j 18/05/2018?y; R';ff;fhud;ghisak; fpuhkj;jpy; "m1" tpsk;guk; bra;ag;gl;lJ/ ehsJtiu bghJkf;fsplk; ,Ue;J Ml;nrgizfs; VJk; tug;bgwtpy;iy/ nkYk; nkw;go epykhw;wk; Fwpj;J 21/05/2018 md;W R';ff;fhud;ghisak; Ch;bghJ kf;fsplk; Ml;nrgiz VJkpy;iy vd;W xU kdjhf thf;FK:yk; bgwg;gl;Ls;sJ/ epykjpg;g[ Kd;EiHt[. Mdkjp tH';fg;gl;Ls;s g[ykhd hP/r 55 MdJ rhiy g[wk;nghf;F vd;gjhy;. mjd; mUfpy; cs;s gl;lh g[ykhd hP/r.54-2=d; ghprPyid bra;jjpy;. XU Vf;fh; kjpg;g[ U:/2.68.000-= vd Fwpgg; plg;gl;Ls;sJ/ mjd;go Kd;EiHt[ mDkjp tH';fg;glt[s;s 0/03/71 bcwf;nlh; (4000 rJuo- 9/17 brz;l; ) epyj;jpd; kjpg;g[ U:/24.575-= (U:gha; ,Ugj;jp ehd;fhapuj;J IE}w;wp vGgj;jp Ie;J kl;Lk;) MfpwJ/ kukjpg;g[ Kd;EiHt[ mDkjp tH';fg;glt[s;s ,lj;jpy; ku';fs; Vjkpy;iy/ vdnt kukjpg;g[ njitapyi ; y/ fw;fpiuak;
Kd;EiHt[ mDkjp tH';fg;glt[s;s uP/r55 fhiyapy; g[jpajhf fw;fs; Vjk; Vw;gltpy;iy/ vdnt fw;fpiuak; tNypf;f ntz;oajpy;iy/ cl;gphpt[ fl;lzk;
Kd;EiHt[ mDkjp kl;Lk; tH';fg;gLtjhy; cl;gphpt[ VJk; bra;ag;gltpy;iy/ epykhw;wk; bra;a[k;nghJ cl;gphpt[ fl;lzk; ,Ug;gpd; mjid nfl;g[j;Jiw brYj;j ntz;Lk;/ bghJ Kd;EiHt[. Mdkjp tH';fglt[s;s g[yj;jpy; nfhapy;. kNjp. rh;r;. g[uhjhdr; rpd;d';fs;. kahdk; Vjkpy;iy/ gpu!;jhg g[yj;jpy; cah; kw;Wk; Fiwe;j mGj;j kpd;fk;gpfs; VJk; bry;ytpy;i ; y/ nkw;go gFjpapy; jw;nghJ rhiy tphpthf;fk; bra;a[k; jpl;lk; Vjkpy;iy vd ghh;it=2y; beL”;rhiyJiw nfhl;l bghwpahsh; bjhptpj;Js;sdh;/ vdnt bgUe;Jiw tl;lk;. r';fud;ghisak; fpuhkk;. g[yvz; 55y; bkhj;jk; cs;s 0/310 Vh;!; gug;gpy; fhypahf cs;s 4000 rJuo gug;gij jp';fS:h; rhh;gjpthsh; mYtyf fl;olk; fl;l gjpt[j;Jiwf;F gpd;tUk; epge;jidfs; tpjpj;J Kd;EiHt[ mDkjp cj;jutplg;gLfpwJ/ 5/14 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.24344 of 2019 epge;jidfs;
1/ muR tpjpfF ; k; epge;jidfSf;F cl;gl ntz;Lk;
2/ fl;olk; vGg;g[tjw;F Kd; epykhw;wk; bra;ag;gl cs;s gug;gpid epy msit bra;J ehd;Fkhy;fis cWjp bra;J bfhs;s ntz;Lk;/ 3/ epykhw;wj;jpd; nghJ kukjpg;g[. fy;fl;lzk; kw;Wk; cl;gphpt[ fl;lzk; nghd;w ,ju fl;lz';fs; ,Ug;gpd; nfl;gj[ ;Jiw beL”;rhiyj;Jiwapdhplk; xj;jpirt[ bgw;W rkh;gpf;f ntz;Lk;
; iw beL”;rhiyj;Jiwapdhplk; xj;jpirt[ bgw;W rkh;gpff; ntz;Lk;/ 4/ nfl;g[jJ 5/ ve;j nehf;fj;jpw;fhf epy khw;wk; bra;ag;gLfpd;wnjh mjw;fhf kl;Lnk gpu!;jhg epyj;jpid gad;gLj;j ntz;Lk;/ 6/ vjphf; hyj;jpy; gpu!;jhg g[ynkh my;yJ mjd; xU gFjpnah njitapy;iy vd;why; mjid tUtha; Jiwaplk; jpUk;g xg;gilf;f ntz;Lk;/ nkw;go Kd;EiHt[ mDkjp tH';fg;gl;l ,lj;jpid nfl;g[j;Jiwf;F RthjPdk; 15 jpd';fSf;Fs; RthjPdr; rhd;Wld; Kgikahd totpy; epy chpik khw;w Kd;bkhHptpid mDg;gpitf;Fk;go bgUe;Jiwtl;lhl;rpah; kw;Wk; <nuhL tUtha; nfhl;l mYtyUf;Fk; cj;jutplg;gLfpwJ/
7. Material on record discloses that earlier, Mr.T.P.Subramani, who has offered his lands, for the purpose of construction of the office of Sub- Registrar, has filed W.P.No.31443 of 2012, for a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents therein, to construct Thingalur Sub-Registrar office, in pursuance to Proc.No.42163/H1/2011, dated 3/2/2012, issued by the first respondent, in the land in R.S.No.10/52/1B and 52/2B (Old S.F.No.56) of Sungakaranpalayam, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District, which was donated by the petitioner, under the Gift Deed, dated 10/10/2008 (Doc.No.2244 of 2008) and Rectification Deed, dated 18/5/2009 (Doc.No.826/2009) in the name of 6/14 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.24344 of 2019 the first respondent by considering the representation, dated 7/11/2012.
8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, vide, order, dated 9/8/2015, writ Court, dismissed W.P.No.31443 of 2012, as hereunder:-
“3. It has been stated that the petitioner had gifted a portion of his lands, by way of a gift deed, dated 10.10.2008, registered as Document No.2244 of 2008, and a rectification deed, dated 18.5.2009, registered as Document No.826 of 2009. The gift deed had been registered by the petitioner in favour of the first respondent, for the construction of the Sub Registrar Office at Sungakaranpalayam, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District . However, instead of constructing the Sub Registrar office at Sungakaranpalayam, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District, the first respondent had taken a decision and had issued orders to construct the Sub Registrar office at Kasukaranpalayam, in Erode District. Therefore, the petitioner has preferred the present Writ Petition before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that there is no right vested in the petitioner to demand that the Sub Registrar office ought to be constructed only at Sungakaranpalayam, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District, as prayed for by the petitioner in his representation, dated 7.11.2012. The first respondent had issued certain directions to construct the Sub Registrar Office, at Kasukaranpalayam, in Erode District due to administrative reasons. Therefore, the relief prayed for by the petitioner in the present writ petition cannot be granted.
5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties concerned and on a perusal of the records available, this Court is of the considered view that the relief prayed for by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition cannot be granted. In the present case the first respondent had issued certain directions to construct the Sub Registrar office, at Kasukaranpalayam, in Erode District, due to administrative reasons, even though a gift deed is said to have been registered, by the petitioner, in favour of the respondent department, for the construction of the Sub Registrar office, at Sungakaranpalayam, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District.
6. It is clear that there could be no vested right in the petitioner to make a demand that the Sub Registrar Office ought to be 7/14 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.24344 of 2019 5 constructed only at Sungakaranpalayam, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District, even though he has gifted a portion of his lands in favour of the respondent department, for the construction of the said building.
The decision of the Supreme Court, in J.R.Raghupathy Vs. State of A.P. (1988) 4 SCC 364 and the decision of the Division Bench in R.Nanjappan Vs. The District Collector, Coimbatore, 2005 Writ L.R. 47, confirms the said view.
7. It has also been pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondents that a proposal has been sent, by the District Registrar, Erode District, dated 20.12.2014, to the first respondent to return the lands in question, to the petitioner, as it has not been used for the purpose for which it had been gifted. Therefore, it is for the first respondent to take an appropriate decision on the proposal, dated 20.12.2014, made by the District Registrar, Erode District, and to pass appropriate orders thereon.
8. In such circumstances, this Court finds it appropriate to dismiss the writ petition, as it is devoid of merits. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. However, it goes without saying that it would be open to the petitioner to make a representation to the first respondent for the return of the lands, in R.S.No.52/1B and 52/2B (Old S.F.No.56) of Sungakaranpalayam, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District, as it has not been utilised by the first respondent for the purpose for which it had been given. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.”
9. Perusal of the above shows that writ Court declined to grant the relief, holding that there is no vested right in the demand of Thiru.T.P.Subramaniam. However, writ Court has granted liberty to the petitioner therein, to make a representation to the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai, first respondent therein, for the allotment of land, in R.S.No.52/1B and 52/2B (Old S.F.No.56) of Sungakaranpalayam, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District, as it has not been utilised by the first respondent, for the purpose for which it had been given.
8/14 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.24344 of 2019
10. Representation of the petitioner, dated 7/10/2016, said to have been addressed to the Hon'ble Chief Minister, State of Tamil Nadu, with copies marked to the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai District and others, to take steps, for construction of the office of Thingalur Sub-Registrar's office, at S.No.309/12. As stated supra, S.No.309/9, Thingalur Village, has been sub- divided as 309/12, for the purpose of construction of Sub-Registrar's office and that when a demand has been made for construction in the said place, writ petition has been dismissed.
11. Material on record discloses that consequent to the rejection and on account of objections from public, proceeding in R.C.No.25558/15/U4, dated 23/1/2017 has been issued, on behalf of the District Collector with copies marked to Tahsildar, Perundurai Taluk; District Registrar (Administration), Erode; Revenue Divisional Officer, Erode. Impugned proceeding, in Na.Ka.No.25558/2015/U4, dated 23/1/2017, issued on behalf of the District Collector, Erode, is as follows:-
“Erode District, Perundurai Circle, Thingalur, land extent of 01210 square meters in S.No.309/9 natham purampokku land is allocated to construct the Sub-Registrar Office and also as per the 9/14 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.24344 of 2019 order reference 2, the proposal order has been given to registration Department.
The proposal order in Reference 2 has been cancelled by the Hearing Department because of the public has objected to the construction of Sub-Registrar Office on that land. The Tahsildar, instructed to report about taking the possession of land immediately from the revenue Department.”
12. The said proceeding is an internal correspondence between the District Collector, Erode and Tahsildar, Perundurai, with copies marked to others. It is trite law that the writ petition against the internal correspondence is not maintainable in law. Reference can be made to few decisions.
13. In Bachhittar Singh Vs. State of Punjab, reported in AIR 1963 SC 395, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has considered as to whether a note file which did not fructify into an order and communicated to the petitioner therein, can give rise to a cause of action and at paragraph Nos.9 and 10, held as follows:
“9. The question, therefore, is whether he did in fact make such an order. Merely writing something on the file does not amount to an order. Before something amounts to an order of the State Government two things are necessary. The order has to be expressed in the name of the Governor as required by clause (1) of Article 166 and then it has to be communicated.10/14
http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.24344 of 2019 As already indicated, no formal order modifying the decision of the Revenue Secretary was ever made. Until such an order is drawn up the State Government cannot, in our opinion, be regarded as bound by was stated in the file.
10. Thus it is of the essence that the order has to be communicated to the person who would be affected by that order before the State and that person can be bound by that order. For, until the order is communicated to the person affected by it, it would be open to the Council of Ministers to consider the matter over and over again and, therefore, till its communication the order cannot be regarded as anything more than provisional in character.
14. The views expressed in Bachhittar Singh's case, have been followed in Laxminarayan R.Bhattad Vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in 2003(5) SCC 413, where, the Supreme Court held, a right created under an order of a statutory authority must be communicated to the person concerned, so as to confer an enforceable right. The said proposition of law has once again reaffirmed in Sethi Auto Service Station Vs. Delhi Development Authority, reported in 2009 (1) SCC 180, Where, the Apex Court held that internal notings and departmental communications between Government Agencies do not have the sanction of law to be an effective order, unless it culminates into an executable order, by communication to the person concerned, affecting his right or conferring any legal right. Reliance can also be made to the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India and others Vs. 11/14 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.No.24344 of 2019 Vartak Labour Union (2), reported in (2011) 4 SCC 200.
15. Material on record further discloses that request to construct Sub- Registrar's Office, at S.No.309/9, sub-divided as 309/12 has already been considered by this Court, in W.P.No.31443 of 2012 and that the same has been rejected. Order made in W.P.No.31443 of 2012 squarely applies to the facts of this case.
16. In the light of the discussion and decisions considered, instant writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
(S.M.K.,J) (S.P.,J)
th
19 August 2019
mvs.
Index: Yes/no
Internet: yes/no
12/14
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.24344 of 2019
To
1. The Inspector General of Registration
100 Santhome High Road
Chennai 600 028.
2. The District Collector
Erode District
Collectorate
Erode 638 011.
3. The District Registrar (Administration)
O/o. The District Registrar
Erode.
4. The Sub-Registrar
O/o. The Sub-Registrar
Thingalur 638 055.
5. The Tahsildar
Perundurai Taluk
Perundurai
Erode 638 052.
13/14
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.24344 of 2019
S.MANIKUMAR,J
AND
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD,J
mvs.
Writ Petition No.24344 of 2017
19/8/2019
14/14
http://www.judis.nic.in