Madras High Court Orders Investigation into Missing Land Records
The Madras High Court has mandated a comprehensive investigation into the disappearance of original land acquisition documents, which had been missing for several years following their transfer to the Government Pleader’s office in 2021. These documents were related to a land dispute case, Secretary Vs Nagraj. The High Court noted that while the records were ultimately recovered, their absence had led to the presentation of allegedly forged documents by certain litigants, attempting to claim rights over land acquired by the government nearly five decades earlier for the Coimbatore bypass.
During the period when the original records were unavailable, litigants managed to secure a partially favorable ruling from a single-judge bench in 2025, relying on altered land records or A-Registers presented in court. However, after state authorities contested this ruling before a Division Bench, the original documents were found. The Division Bench overturned the single-judge order upon discovering that the original land acquisition records contradicted the claims made by the litigants who sought ownership of government-acquired property.
Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan have directed the Coimbatore District Collector to investigate the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of the original records and the altered A-Registers submitted to the court. “We direct the second appellant, the District Collector, to conduct a thorough inquiry regarding the missing records during the hearing before the learned Single Judge and the altered A-Registers filed by the petitioners,” stated the court’s order dated September 3. The Collector is instructed to file a complaint against those involved in any fabrication or manipulation of records, depending on the findings.
Background of the Case
The case revolves around the acquisition of land in Pattanam village, Coimbatore district, intended for a bypass or outer ring road. The land acquisition process began in 1974, with compensation awarded in 1978. Among the acquired land was 4.06 acres owned by Ramasamy Konar and his brother Kalimuthu Konar. Ramasamy Konar passed away in 2019 without contesting the acquisition proceedings. However, in 2020, a writ petition was filed by Nagaraj, claiming that only part of the acquired land was used for the highway, with the remainder still under Konar’s possession and unpaid compensation.
Nagaraj asserted that Ramasamy Konar had bequeathed the remaining land to him through a will executed in 2018. Thus, Nagaraj claimed rightful ownership, alleging that the acquisition proceedings for this portion had lapsed. After Nagaraj’s death during the petition’s pendency, his heirs continued the legal battle. They presented revenue records indicating Konar as the landowner.
More Read
The Tamil Nadu government and Highways authorities opposed the petition. However, during proceedings before the High Court’s single-judge bench, the original land acquisition files were unavailable to confirm or refute the petitioners’ claims. A status report indicated the original file had been transferred to the Government Pleader’s office, but it was not subsequently traceable.
The single judge described the situation as “startling,” and departmental action was initiated against an official over the missing files. The judge concluded the writ petition by instructing authorities to reassess the necessity of the disputed property for public use, and if needed, consider compensation for the petitioners. Otherwise, the property should be released.
Division Bench Findings
The single-judge verdict was appealed by the State, and during this appeal, the original records were found. Upon comparison, the Division Bench identified discrepancies. The original records classified the land as “Government Poramboke,” with an entry for “National Highways,” while the version submitted by the petitioners appeared altered, inserting Ramasamy Konar’s name.
More Read
The Court concluded that the petitioners attempted to improperly claim government resources with assistance from certain individuals within a state department. “The petitioners’ claim was supported by records which, when compared with the original files produced before this Court, appear to have been fabricated or manipulated,” the Court determined.
Consequently, the Court upheld the State’s appeal and called for an investigation into the missing records and the alleged document fabrication by the petitioners. Representing the State were Additional Advocate General P. V. Balasubramaniam and Government Pleader K. Kumaran, while Senior Advocate Abdul Saleem, instructed by Advocate B. Nithish Kumar, represented the petitioners. Additional Solicitor General A. R. L. Sundaresan, assisted by Standing Counsel S. U. Srinivasan, appeared for the NHAI.
