← Library
Madras High CourtWP/2775/2024disposed of

M.Selvaraj v. The District Collector

2024-02-08Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 08.02.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN M.Selvaraj ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Salem District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Division, Sankari, Salem District.

3. The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, Edapppadi, Salem District.

4. The Revenue Inspector, Office of the Tahsildar, Edapppadi, Salem District.

5. K.Marimuthu ... Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 2 and 3 to add the name of the petitioner in the TSLR Patta issued to the S.No.50/7A, 50/7B, 50/P6, 50/P8, 50/P9, TSLR Ward A, Block 8, TSLR No 10 / 13 2021 / 0153 / 002499TR dated 30.07.2021. For Petitioner : M/s.Radhika Boopathi For R1 to R4 : Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 2 and 3 to add the name of the petitioner in the TSLR Patta issued with regard to S.No.50/7A, 50/7B, 50/P6, 50/P8, 50/P9, TSLR Ward A, Block 8, TSLR No. 10 / 13 2021 / 0153 / 002499TR dated 30.07.2021.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents.

3. Since no adverse order is passed against the private respondent, notice to the private respondent/R5 is dispensed with.

4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner made representation before the respondents 1 and 2 on 01.09.2022. Based on the petitioner's representation, though the respondents have issued summons and also conducted enquiry, they have not passed final order so far.

.

5. It is seen from the records, based on the representation given by the petitioner, the respondents have issued summon to the petitioner. It is the contention of the petitioner that though enquiry was conducted by the respondents, no final order has been passed.

6. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and taking into consideration the limited prayer sought for by the petitioner, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, this Court directs the respondents 2 and 3 to

consider the petitioner representation dated 01.09.2022 after issuing notice to the petitioner, private respondent/R5, adjacent land owners of the four boundaries of the subject property/interested parties/rival claimants/objectors if any, if already not issued and conduct enquiry in the manner known to law, if already not conducted and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, if already not passed orders. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. With the abovesaid direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

08.02.2024 mfa Index:Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No

To

1. The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Salem District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Division, Sankari, Salem District.

3. The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, Edapppadi, Salem District.

4. The Revenue Inspector, Office of the Tahsildar, Edapppadi, Salem District.

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

mfa 08.02.2024