Narpavi Homes Pvt.Ltd., v. The State Rep.By Its Secretary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.10.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU W.P.No.12371 of 2016 1.Narpavi Homes Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director, J.Jayakrishnan No.19, Vellaiyan Street, Kotturpuram, Chennai 600 085.

2.A.V.Krishnan .. Petitioners vs 1.The State Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Govt. Of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.Geoge, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

2.The Additional Chief Secretary/Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.

3.The District Collector, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram.

4.The District Revenue Officer, Kancheepuram.

.. Respondents PRAYER:Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the order dated 12.01.2015 in RC No.F2/10663/2014 of the second respondent and quash the same and direct the second respondent herein to consider the revision

petition dated 15.04.2014 filed by the petitioners and pass orders on merits.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.S.Arumugam For Respondents : Mr.A.Kumar Special Government Pleader.

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed challenging the order of the second respondent refusing to entertain the revision petition filed by the petitioners on the ground that the same was filed belatedly, apart from the fact that these petitioners were not a party before the District Revenue Officer, whose order is sought to be revised before the second respondent.

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

3.It is seen that the petitioners are subsequent purchasers of a property from their vendor in the year 2011. But the fact remains that the assignment granted in favour of the vendor in respect of the subject matter property was cancelled by the Tahsildar, Chengalpet, through the proceedings dated 25.03.1965, confirmed by the Sub Collector, Chengalpet on 09.05.1981. Again, the District Revenue Officer confirmed the above said two orders through proceedings dated 19.10.2011. Thereafter, the present petitioners filed the revision before the second respondent, who in turn, rejected the revision as stated supra.

I do not find any ground to interfere with the order passed by the second respondent, more particularly, on the reason that the very purchase of the petitioners from their vendors was much later after the cancellation of the assignment as early as in the year 1965. Therefore, on the date of very purchase, the petitioners did not have any right nor their vendors have any title to convey the same. Apart from the said fact, the petitioners have approached the second respondent with undue delay of 2 1/2 years. On both the grounds, the second respondent rejected the revision, with which I do not find any justification to interfere. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs.

Sd/ Assistant Registrar /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar

To 1.The State Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Govt. Of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.Geoge, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

2.The Additional Chief Secretary/Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.

3.The District Collector, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram.

4.The District Revenue Officer, Kancheepuram.

+2cc to Mr.AL.Gandhimathi, Advocate SR.Nos.75530 & 75488 +1cc to Government Pleader SR.No.75695 W.P NO.12371 of 2016 SDR 17.11.2017