Revenue authorities cannot adjudicate pathway disputes over patta lands; parties must seek remedies through Civil Courts.

The petitioner, P. Murugan, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the District Collector and revenue authorities (Respondents 1 to 4) to remove obstructions on "Sempayee Road"

The petitioner claimed this was a village road necessary to access his agricultural patta lands in Thumbipadi village

Conversely, the Tahsildar of Kadayampatti filed a counter-affidavit stating that following an inquiry, the land in question was identified as ancestral private "patta land" belonging to Respondents 5, 6, and 7, rather than a public road

A dispute over the use of this land as a pathway had persisted between the private parties for four years

1. Whether the High Court can exercise its writ jurisdiction to order the removal of obstructions on land identified by revenue authorities as private patta land

2. Whether the dispute regarding the right of passage over private ancestral property falls under the jurisdiction of the revenue authorities or the Civil Court

The Court relied on the Circular issued by the Additional Chief Secretary/Commissioner of Land Administration, Chennai (Letter No. K3/27160/2008, dated 12.03.2018). This circular mandates that revenue authorities must accurately maintain patta names and acknowledges that only Civil Courts are competent to decide titles or resolve unsolved disputes between parties

It further directs that if a civil suit is pending or the matter involves private title disputes, the authorities should not pass orders but direct the parties to seek remedies through a competent Civil Court based on a decree and judgment

The Court observed that the Tahsildar’s inquiry concluded the subject land was registered as ancestral patta land in the names of the private respondents

Applying the principles of the 2018 Circular, the Court reasoned that since the land is not public property but private patta land, the revenue authorities lack the jurisdiction to adjudicate the petitioner’s right of way or remove obstructions as if it were a public encroachment

The Court determined that the dispute is essentially a civil matter between private individuals regarding the use of private land for passage, which requires evidence-based adjudication that can only be provided by a Civil Court

The Court dismissed the Writ Petition and granted liberty to the parties to approach the competent Civil Court to adjudicate the issue of the pathway

No costs were awarded