{"id":244165,"date":"2010-12-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-12-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010"},"modified":"2017-06-02T07:58:35","modified_gmt":"2017-06-02T02:28:35","slug":"periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010","title":{"rendered":"Periya Rowther vs The District Collector on 3 December, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Periya Rowther vs The District Collector on 3 December, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 03\/12\/2010\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA\n\nW.P.(MD).No.8211 of 2007\n\nPeriya Rowther\t\t\t\t\t... Petitioner\n\nVs.\n\n1.The District Collector,\n   Madurai District,\n   Madurai - 20.\n\n2.The Special Tahsildar,\n   (Land Acquisition)\n   Adi Dravidar Welfare Unit-I,\n   Officer of the District Collector,\n   Madurai - 20.\t\t\t\t... Respondents\n\nPRAYER\n\nWrit Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India\npraying for the issue of a Writ of certiorari, to call for the records relating\nto the impugned notification of the 1st respondent issued under Section 4(1) of\nthe Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act (31\/1978)\npublished in the District Gazette as a special publication on 31.01.2005 and the\nconsequent award proceedings of the 2nd respondent in reference\nNa.Ka.No.A\/413\/04, dated 16.03.2005 in respect of an extent of 0.40.5 hectares\nin Survey No.285\/2 in Periya Ooseri, Madurai District and quash the same in so\nfar as the petitioner is concerned.\n\n!For Petitioner\t... Mr.K.Mahendran\t\t\t\t\n^For Respondents... Mrs.V.Chellammal, AAG\n\t\t    and Mr.M.Rajarajan, GA\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe 2nd respondent\/the Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition), Madurai, for<br \/>\nthe purpose of acquiring lands at Periya Oorseri under the provisions of Tamil<br \/>\nNadu Acquisition of land for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act, issued statutory<br \/>\nnotices to the persons concerned to acquire an extent of 0.40.5 hectares from<br \/>\nfrom the petitioner&#8217;s land in Survey No.285\/2.  The notice was issued to the<br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s brother A.Shahul Hammed calling for enquiry and in response to the<br \/>\nsaid notice, the petitioner&#8217;s brother appeared for enquiry before the 2nd<br \/>\nrespondent and thereafter, published a notification under Section 4(1) of the<br \/>\nAct.  Thereafter, the same was published in the District Gazette as a special<br \/>\npublication on 31.01.2005.  Immediately after coming to know about the enquiry<br \/>\nproceedings in District Gazette publication, the petitioner made a<br \/>\nrepresentation to the 2nd respondent, stating that no notice was issued in<br \/>\nS.No.258\/2 and it is stated that the 4(1) notification issued on 31.01.2005 was<br \/>\nillegal, as there was no notice given to him for holding the enquiry.  Further,<br \/>\nafter the petitioner&#8217;s representation, the 2nd respondent issued award notice<br \/>\nunder Section 5(1) of the Act and also final orders were passed in proceedings<br \/>\nNo.2\/2004-2005 clearly admitting in the award proceedings that the original<br \/>\nnotice was issued to his brother and since the 2nd respondent has admitted in<br \/>\nthe award proceedings that the notice was issued to the petitioner only in the<br \/>\naward proceedings, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner<br \/>\nthat the 2nd respondent had not issued any notice to the real owner of the land<br \/>\nbefore the petitioner&#8217;s land was acquired.  Therefore, it was contended that the<br \/>\nentire acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondent under 4(1)<br \/>\nnotification published in the District Gazette and award proceedings dated<br \/>\n16.03.2005, in so far as the petitioner is concerned, are arbitrary, against the<br \/>\nprovisions of the Act and also without any jurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. Further, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is<br \/>\nthat admittedly, the petitioner being absolute and lawful owner of the land, he<br \/>\nshould have been heard in accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition<br \/>\nAct.  When an objection was given by the petitioner, the said objection was not<br \/>\neven properly considered by the District Collector as per Section 4(3)(b) of the<br \/>\nAct.  He further contended that under Section 4(3)(b) of the Act, the District<br \/>\nCollector should consider the report submitted by the Special Tahsildar and pass<br \/>\norder, as he deems fit.  Only thereafter, he can notify his decision to acquire<br \/>\nthe land as contemplated under Section 4(1) of the Act, but if the authorities<br \/>\nconcerned failed to apply their mind under Section 4(3)(b) of the Act, any such<br \/>\nfurther proceedings initiated under Section 4(3)(b), cannot be sustained<br \/>\nlegally.  On that basis, the learned counsel for the petitioner urged this Court<br \/>\nto allow the writ petition by quashing the acquisition proceedings in so far as<br \/>\nthe petitioner land is concerned.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents<br \/>\nsubmits that the statutory notice in Form-I dated 29.07.2004, as contemplated<br \/>\nunder Section 4(2) of the said Act, was issued to all the interested persons<br \/>\nthrough the VAO, Periya Oorseri village, asking them to appear before the 2nd<br \/>\nrespondent herein with their objections if any on 13.08.2004.  In response to<br \/>\nthat, all the persons interested in the lands covered in the acquisition<br \/>\nproceedings, appeared for the enquiry on 13.08.2004 and expressed their<br \/>\nwillingness that they have no objection whatsoever to the land acquisition<br \/>\nproceedings, except one Tmt.Asia Begum, w\/o Ibrahim, who objected to the<br \/>\nacquisition proceedings.  In the revenue records, namely, &#8216;A&#8217; Register, &#8216;Chitta&#8217;<br \/>\nand &#8216;adangal&#8217;, since the name of Sahul Hameed, the younger brother of the<br \/>\npetitioner alone, was found as person interested in respect of lands comprising<br \/>\nof an extent of 0.40.5 hectare of land, out of the total extent of 2.92.5<br \/>\nhectares in S.No.285\/2 of Oorcheri Village in Patta No.283, the statutory notice<br \/>\nin Form-I as contemplated under Section 4(2) of the said Act, was served upon<br \/>\nhim.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn response to the said notice, the petitioner&#8217;s brother Sahul Hameed,<br \/>\nalso appeared for the enquiry on 13.08.2004 and gave a statement to the effect<br \/>\nthat he had no objection whatsoever in the proposed acquisition.  Only after the<br \/>\nsaid enquiry, the proposals were submitted by the 2nd respondent to the District<br \/>\nCollector and thereafter, the 4(1) notification was issued in the Madurai<br \/>\nDistrict Gazette dated 31.01.2005 and as a result, the aforesaid lands vested<br \/>\nwith the Government free from all encumbrances.  It was also further submitted<br \/>\nthat not only the Form-I notice as contemplated under Section 4(2) of the said<br \/>\nAct, the another notice in Form II as specified under Rule 5(1) of Tamil Nadu<br \/>\nAcquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare Rules, 1979, was also served on the said<br \/>\nSahul Hameed, who is the only interested person of S.No.285\/2, for determining<br \/>\nquantum of compensation, as his name alone was shown in the revenue records.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. At this juncture, the petitioner has sent a letter dated 21.02.2005<br \/>\nstating that the portion, wherein survey demarcation work is being taken up,<br \/>\nactually belongs to him by way of oral partition between himself and his brother<br \/>\nSahul Hameed and subsequently, his name was also included in the patta as joint<br \/>\npattadar on 01.02.2005.  Therefore, he asked for deletion of land from the<br \/>\nacquisition proceedings.  Since the 4(1) notification was published on<br \/>\n31.01.2005 and thereupon, the possession was also taken on the date by passing<br \/>\naward on 16.03.2005, the petitioner&#8217;s representation stating that as per oral<br \/>\npartition statement, the property covered under acquisition was owned by him<br \/>\nonly on 21.02.2005, was also considered by the Collector.  Since petitioner has<br \/>\nfiled the writ petition only on 24.09.2007, after a lapse more than two years<br \/>\nfrom the date of award, it was forcibly submitted by the learned Additional<br \/>\nAdvocate General for the respondents that in the light of ratio laid down by the<br \/>\nApex Court in AIR 2000 SC 671, no writ petition can be filed challenging the<br \/>\nacquisition notice or against any proceedings thereunder, that too, two years<br \/>\nafter the award was passed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. Moreover, the writ petition having been filed only after two years from<br \/>\nthe date of award and in the meanwhile, since 50 beneficiaries have been<br \/>\nselected and house site patta also have been issued to them, the writ petition<br \/>\non the ground that the conditions enunciated under Section 4(3)(b) of the Act<br \/>\nhave not been complied with, cannot be entertained, in fact, when the Collector<br \/>\nhas also duly considered the petitioner&#8217;s objection in his proceedings passed in<br \/>\nNa.Ka.No.ADW7\/96235\/2004, dated 15.01.2005.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. The proceedings dated 15.01.2005 passed by the District Collector in<br \/>\nNa.Ka.No.ADW7\/96235\/2004 clearly indicate that the District Collector has<br \/>\nrightly considered the objections as contemplated under Section 4(3)(b) of the<br \/>\nAct.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. In the present case, the Tahsildar, who is the authorised officer, has<br \/>\nissued show cause notice to the owner of the land and after receiving the<br \/>\nobjection filed by the petitioner, the 2nd respondent sent his remarks to the<br \/>\nDistrict Collector for his decision.  After receipt of the remarks from the 2nd<br \/>\nrespondent, the District Collector has considered the objections of the owner,<br \/>\nnamely, the petitioner herein.  Since the District Collector was of the opinion<br \/>\nthat the revenue records did not disclose the name of the petitioner, he has<br \/>\nrightly overruled his objection and therefore, the petitioner cannot have any<br \/>\ngrievance that Section 4(3)(b) of the Act has not been complied with.<br \/>\nAccordingly, the judgments cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner in<br \/>\nthe case of Chinna Gounder Vs. District Collector, Salem and Another ((2006) 4<br \/>\nMLJ 1328), to say that in view of this judgment, the entire land acquisition<br \/>\nproceedings initiated by the respondents under Section 4(1) of the Act is<br \/>\nillegal for the reason that the District Collector, who alone can consider the<br \/>\nobjection of the land owner, but unfortunately, the procedure adopted by the<br \/>\nrespondents have not complied with Section 4(3)(b) of the Act, does not advance<br \/>\nhis case any further, in view of the proceeding dated 15.01.2005 passed by the<br \/>\nDistrict Collector, Salem.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn fact, the Tahsildar has sent his report, after receipt of the<br \/>\nobjections from the petitioner, the same was also duly considered by the<br \/>\nDistrict Collector in the said proceedings.  Therefore, I am of the view that<br \/>\nthe respondent has exercised the authority in issuing the notification after<br \/>\nsatisfaction about the necessity of acquiring the lands in question to provide<br \/>\nhouse sites to the landless downtrodden and poor adidravidars residing in Periya<br \/>\nOorseri Village and the action of the 2nd respondent in rejecting the claim of<br \/>\nthe petitioner in the award enquiry is therefore perfectly legal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. Further, when the petitioner&#8217;s brother Sahul Hameed has sent a<br \/>\nrepresentation dated 07.03.2005, stating that the entire lands covered under the<br \/>\nacquisition in S.No.285\/2 stood registered only in his name at the time of<br \/>\nissuance of the statutory notice under Section 4(2) of the said Act.  Therefore,<br \/>\nhis consent for acquisition of the land has been properly considered and<br \/>\nthereafter, the 4(1) notification was published in the Government Gazette on<br \/>\n31.01.2005.  Till the publication of 4(1) Notification on 31.01.2005, the<br \/>\npetitioner has neither brought to the notice of the respondents the subsequent<br \/>\ninclusion of his name as a Joint Pattadar by virtue of alleged oral family<br \/>\nsettlement nor his legal claim.  In as much as, as per Section 5(1) of the said<br \/>\nAct, the lands stood in the name of his brother, also vested with the Government<br \/>\nfree from all encumbrances with effect from the date of publication of 4(1)<br \/>\nNotification in the Government Gazette on 31.01.2005, hence, I do not find any<br \/>\nmerit in the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9. Similarly, another judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the<br \/>\npetitioner reported in (2001) 1 MLJ 328 also deals with only the compliance of<br \/>\nSection 4(3)(b) of the said Act.  As I already held that the above said<br \/>\nprovision has been duly complied with, the said judgment cannot be relied on by<br \/>\nhim.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10. That apart, the respondents had already identified 50 beneficiaries<br \/>\nand they have also granted house site pattas on 15.08.2006 during the<br \/>\nIndependence Day Celebrations and many of the beneficiaries who were all<br \/>\nidentified as houseless adidravidars, have constructed small huts and house and<br \/>\nliving therein and in any event, since the writ petition came to be filed 2<br \/>\nyears from the date of passing of the award, as per the ratio held by the Apex<br \/>\nCourt in AIR 2000 SC 671, no writ petition can be filed challenging the<br \/>\nacquisition notice two years after the passing of the award.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11. Accordingly, this Court, for the aforesaid reasons, finding no merit<br \/>\nin the writ petition, dismisses the same.  No Costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>rkm<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.The District Collector,<br \/>\n   Madurai District,<br \/>\n   Madurai &#8211; 20.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The Special Tahsildar,<br \/>\n   (Land Acquisition)<br \/>\n   Adi Dravidar Welfare Unit-I,<br \/>\n   Officer of the District Collector,<br \/>\n   Madurai &#8211; 20.\t<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Periya Rowther vs The District Collector on 3 December, 2010 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03\/12\/2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.(MD).No.8211 of 2007 Periya Rowther &#8230; Petitioner Vs. 1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai &#8211; 20. 2.The Special Tahsildar, (Land Acquisition) Adi Dravidar Welfare Unit-I, Officer of [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-244165","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Periya Rowther vs The District Collector on 3 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Periya Rowther vs The District Collector on 3 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-12-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-06-02T02:28:35+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Periya Rowther vs The District Collector on 3 December, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-02T02:28:35+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1781,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010\",\"name\":\"Periya Rowther vs The District Collector on 3 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-02T02:28:35+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Periya Rowther vs The District Collector on 3 December, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Periya Rowther vs The District Collector on 3 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Periya Rowther vs The District Collector on 3 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-12-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-06-02T02:28:35+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Periya Rowther vs The District Collector on 3 December, 2010","datePublished":"2010-12-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-02T02:28:35+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010"},"wordCount":1781,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010","name":"Periya Rowther vs The District Collector on 3 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-12-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-02T02:28:35+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/periya-rowther-vs-the-district-collector-on-3-december-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Periya Rowther vs The District Collector on 3 December, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/244165","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=244165"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/244165\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=244165"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=244165"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=244165"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}