Bangiraj v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 13.02.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR Bangiraj ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Krishnagiri District.

2.The Tahsildar, Soolagiri, Krishnagiri District.

3.The Assistant Settlement Officer (South) Directorate of Settlement Office, Third Floor, Survey House, Chepauk, Chennai - 5.

... Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to make necessary correction in the revenue and village record with respect to the survey No.357/2, Marandapalli Village, Soolagiri Taluk, Krishnagiri based on the representation dated 06.05.2022. For Petitioner : Mrs.R.Poornima For Respondents : Mr.P.Sathish Additional Government Pleader 1/5

O R D E R

The prayer sought for herein is for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to make necessary correction in the revenue and village record with respect to the Survey No.357/2, Marandapalli Village, Soolagiri Taluk, Krishnagiri based on the representation dated 06.05.2022.

2. In respect of property at Survey No.357/2, Marandapalli Village, Soolagiri Taluk, Krishnagiri, it is the claim of the petitioner that, already patta stood in the name of the petitioner, however in UDR survey it has been wrongly entered as 'Anadheenam', therefore in order to rectify the same, though the petitioner had given a representation on 06.05.2022 to the respondents herein, the said representation since has not been considered and the grievance of the petitioner has not been redressed, the petitioner has moved the present writ petition.

3. Heard Mr.P.Sathish, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, who would submit that, if at all any change is required on the entry made pursuant to the UDR survey, it has to be considered and decided only by the District Revenue Officer since 2/5

whom the request having not been given, neither the Tahsildar nor the Settlement Officer cannot consider the said representation, therefore if the petitioner comes forward to give representation to the District Revenue Officer concerned, it would be considered and decided on merits.

4. Considering the said submission made by the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents, this Court is inclined to dispose of this writ petition with the following orders: That it is open to the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the District Revenue Officer concerned within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of the same, the District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri shall consider the said representation to be submitted by the petitioner and accordingly decide the same on merits and in accordance with law within eight weeks thereafter.

3/5

5. Since the District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri is not a party to this writ petition, a copy of this order shall be forwarded to the District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri for necessary action as indicated above.

6. With this direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 13.02.2023 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No Sgl To 1.The District Collector, Krishnagiri District.

2.The Tahsildar, Soolagiri, Krishnagiri District.

3.The Assistant Settlement Officer (South) Directorate of Settlement Office, Third Floor, Survey House, Chepauk, Chennai - 5.

4.The District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri.

4/5

R.SURESH KUMAR, J.

Sgl W.P.No.3983 of 2023 13.02.2023 5/5