V.Shanmugam v. The Commissioner
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 18.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P.No.5819 of 2025 1.
V.SHANMUGAM 2.
K.SENATHIPATHI 3.
V.S.ESWERAN ... Petitioners Vs 1.
THE COMMISSIONER 119, UTHAMAR GANDHI ROAD, TIRUMURTHY NAGAR, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI-600 034.
2.
JOINT COMMISSIONER 12, NEW COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, PARUTHI MARKET COMPLEX, PALLADAM ROAD, TIRUPPUR-641 604.
3.
THE DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER THIRUPPUR DISTRICT.
4.
EXECUTIVE OFFICER A/M ULAGESWARASAMY THIRUKOVIL, ALLALAPURAM, PALLADAM, OFFICE AT:
A/M MARIAMMAN VINAYAGAR, THIRUKOVILGAL, 1/6
PICHAMPALAYAM, GANDHINAGAR (P), THIRUPPUR-641 603.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to take action on the communication of the first respondent in Muu.mu. No.51406(E)/2023M2 dated 04.08.2023 which was issued based on the petitioners' representation dated 19.07.2023 within the time period stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.R.Anna Gandhi For R1, R2 & R4 : Mr.S.Ravichandran Additional Government Pleader For R3 : Dr.S.Suriya Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to take action based on the communication of the first respondent in Muu.mu. No.51406(E)/2023- M2 dated 04.08.2023 which was issued based on the petitioner's representation dated 19.07.2023. 2/6
2. On perusal of the said communication, the Commissioner merely forwarded the representation of the petitioner for consideration.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the purchaser of the property from one Ayyasamy Gounder. The said Ayyasamy Gounder was the inam holder and therefore, the owner of the property. The petitioner's purchase is in order.
4. When the matter came up for admission, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the first and second respondents would submit that, after considering the issue in detail, a ryotwari Patta has been issued in favour of the temple by order dated 14.08.1968 by the Settlement Tahsildar.
5. If that is the case, the parties could have approached the Tribunal by way of an appeal. It was also open for the parties to file a civil suit. In this case, the order of the Settlement Tahsildar has become final. It is stated that the vendor of the petitioner has already filed O.S.No.702 of 2023 and the same is pending. That being so, the rights of the parties have to be determined 3/6
only in the Civil Court. Therefore, keeping open the liberty of the petitioner to implead itself in the said suit and raise all submissions before the appropriate Civil Court, this writ petition cannot be entertained.
6. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. 18.02.2025 2/2 nsl To 1.
THE COMMISSIONER 119, UTHAMAR GANDHI ROAD, 4/6
TIRUMURTHY NAGAR, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI-600 034.
2.
JOINT COMMISSIONER 12, NEW COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, PARUTHI MARKET COMPLEX, PALLADAM ROAD, TIRUPPUR-641 604.
3.
THE DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER THIRUPPUR DISTRICT.
4.
EXECUTIVE OFFICER A/M ULAGESWARASAMY THIRUKOVIL, ALLALAPURAM, PALLADAM, OFFICE AT:
A/M MARIAMMAN VINAYAGAR, THIRUKOVILGAL, PICHAMPALAYAM, GANDHINAGAR (P), THIRUPPUR-641 603.
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
nsl 5/6
18.02.2025 2/2 6/6