Narayana Reddy v. The District Revenue Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.03.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN W.P.No. 6064/2017 1.Narayana Reddy 2.Srinivasa Reddy
...Petitioners
Vs.
1. The District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.
2. The Sub-Collector, Sub Collector's office, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
3. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Dhenkanikottai, Krishnagiri District.
4. The Village Administrative Officer, Anniyalam Village, Dhenkanikottai Taluk, Krishnagiri District. ...Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioners' representation dated 26.12.2016 for rectification of errors crept in, in the revenue records which were wrongly updated
during UDR in respect of the lands measuring to an extent of 1.10 Acres in Survey No. 583/1 situate at Anniyalam Village, Dhenkanikottai Taluk, Krishnagiri District within the stipulated time. For Petitioners ..
Mr.R.Bharath Kumar For Respondents ..
Mr.S.Pattabiraman, GA
ORDER
By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. Mr.S.Pattabiraman, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
The petitioners would aver that the lands admeasuring to an extent of 1.10 acres in Survey No.583/1, situate at Anniyalam Village, Denkanikottai Taluk, Krishnagiri District, was originally belong to one Muniyappa @ Podappa, who had purchased the same through a registered Sale Deed bearing Doc.No.1175/1936 registered on the file of the Sub Registrar, Hosur and he died intestate leaving behind his legal heir, viz., Chikka Thimma Rayappa and the said person sold the lands through a registered Sale Deed bearing Doc.No.575/2007 dated 05.02.2007 registered on the file of the Sub Registrar, Hosur, in favour of
the petitioners for a valid consideration and according to the petitioner, ever since the said sale, they claim to be in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same. The petitioners, after purchase, have approached the 3rd respondent for issuance of computerised patta and they were informed that the lands were assigned in favour of Depressed Class Community people and as such, it cannot be assigned to the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that at the time of Updating Registry Scheme, a mistake has crept in as if the lands were obtained for Depressed Class Community People whereas it is not so and in this regard, the petitioners had also submitted a representation dated 04.05.2015 to the 2nd respondent for making necessary corrections and since no orders have been passed, the petitioners are constrained to approach this Court by filing the present writ petition.
It is the further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that in the light of G.O.Ms.No.385, Revenue Department dated 17.08.2004, there cannot be any impediment on the part of the 2nd
respondent to make necessary corrections in the UDR in respect of the petitioners' lands and prays for appropriate orders. The Court heard the submissions of Mr.S.Pattabiraman, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. Though the petitioners have prayed for a larger relief, this Court, in the light of the above facts and circumstances and without going into the merits of the claim projected by them, permits the petitioners to submit one more representation to the 1st respondent along with a copy of this order as well as the copy of their earlier representation dated 26.12.2016 submitted to the 2nd respondent, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and upon receipt of the same, the 1st respondent, after putting the concerned person/s on notice, is directed to consider and dispose of the petitioners' representation on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders within a further period of ten weeks thereafter and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioners as well as to the person/s concerned.
The writ petition stands disposed of with the above direction. No costs.
14.03.2017 Speaking Order Index :
No Internet :
Yes AP To
1. The District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.
2. The Sub-Collector, Sub Collector's office, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
3. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Dhenkanikottai, Krishnagiri District.
4. The Village Administrative Officer, Anniyalam Village, Dhenkanikottai Taluk, Krishnagiri District.
M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J., AP W.P.No.6064/2017 14.03.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in