Taking a serious view of the fact that a large number of applicants were being made to run from pillar to post to get patta, even in cases where there were no disputes, the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) has directed the State government to take effective steps in disposing of pending applications and file a report to the court on certain queries raised.
The court was hearing a batch of petitions seeking a direction to the authorities concerned to dispose of the pending applications pertaining to transfer of patta. The petitioners complained that the authorities had not considered their applications pending for several months and in some cases several years.
Justice D. Krishnakumar directed the State to file a report on a series of queries. The court observed that with respect to 1,46,907 pending applications in non-involving sub-division, the Commissioner of Land Administration shall issue proper instructions to all Collectors to dispose of the applications on merits and submit a report to the court.
With regard to the pendency of 6,39,930 applications involving sub-division, the Commissioner of Land Administration shall spell out the time frame for the disposal of the applications pending in taluk levels, as the Director of Survey and Settlement has stated staff shortage as the reason for delay in disposing of the applications.
The court took cognisance of the submission that after completing the training programme to the newly recruited staff, the process to dispose of the applications would be expedited. Taking into account that some of the applicants were illiterate, the court sought to know if there can be a provision to also include the mobile number of the applicant’s family members to receive communication.
The court sought to know if a Zonal Deputy Tahsildar or Special Tahsildar of each taluk concerned can be assigned exclusively to deal with patta cases. The court also sought a report with regard to the re-assessment of the UDR scheme which was evaluated in 1983, thereafter no assessment was made by the Revenue Department. The case was adjourned to September 14.
