Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M. Sumathi, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated 13.12.2021 issued by the Tahsildar, Kundrathur, under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, invoking Sections 30(2)(iii) and 34(k). The notice pertained to land in S.No.14/1A1A in Moulivakkam Village, Kanchipuram. The petitioner sought to quash the notice and restrain the respondents from interfering with her property. The respondents, represented by the District Collector and Tahsildar, filed a counter stating that the petitioner's house was situated in S.No.4 of Moulivakkam Village, which was classified as 'Government Poramboke Eri Karai' (water course poramboke) in revenue records, while the subject land was classified as 'Ryot Nanjai'. The court observed that there was a discrepancy in the survey numbers and classification. The court directed the respondents to conduct a fresh survey in view of the efflux of time, and thereafter conduct an enquiry and take a decision on merits and in accordance with law. The petitioner was given liberty to submit her explanation and documents to defend her case. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations, and no costs were awarded. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
Headnote
A) Disaster Management Act, 2005 - Notice under Sections 30(2)(iii) and 34(k) - Opportunity of Hearing - The petitioner challenged a notice issued under the Disaster Management Act, 2005. The respondent's counter stated that the petitioner's house was situated on Government Poramboke Eri Karai land. The court held that the petitioner must be given an opportunity to submit her explanation and documents, and the authority must conduct a fresh survey and enquiry before taking a final decision. (Paras 2-4) B) Land Law - Classification of Land - Government Poramboke - The subject land was classified as 'Ryot Nanjai' in one survey but as 'Government Poramboke Eri Karai' in revenue records. The court directed a fresh survey due to efflux of time to ascertain the correct classification before any enforcement action. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the notice issued under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 without proper survey and opportunity of hearing is sustainable.
Final Decision
The writ petition is disposed of with directions to the respondents to conduct a fresh survey, conduct an enquiry, and take a decision on merits after providing an opportunity to the petitioner to submit her explanation and documents. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Law Points
- Notice under Disaster Management Act
- 2005 must be preceded by proper enquiry and survey
- Opportunity of hearing must be provided before enforcement action
- Classification of land as Government Poramboke requires verification through fresh survey
