L.Udayakumar v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.02.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN L.Udayakumar S/o.Late Lakshmanan ... Petitioner versus 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chennai North, Puzhal, Chennai - 600 066.

2.The Tahsildhar, Purasawakkam Taluk, Chennai - 600 003.

... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to issue Patta to the petitioner's property in S.No.3180/43, measuring an extent of 2100 sq.ft situated at No.124-A, Secretariat Colony, Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010. Page No.1/5

For Petitioner :

Mr.J.Bharathi Raja For Respondents :

Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader accepts notice for the respondents. With the consent of both parties, the main writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the second respondent to issue Patta to the petitioner's property in S.No.3180/43, measuring an extent of 2100 sq.ft situated at No.124-A, Secretariat Colony, Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010.

3. On a perusal of the records, it is seen that the petitioner has already filed a writ petition in W.P.No.11900 of 2023, seeking for Patta in respect of Page No.2/5

the subject property and this Court, by order dated 21.04.2023 closed the writ petition and directed the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer. Pursuant to the said direction, the petitioner has filed an Appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer/the first respondent herein. The first respondent has also called for the report from the second respondent/Tahsildhar and the same is pending. Even though the proceedings are pending before the first respondent, the petitioner once again has filed the present writ petition, for the very same relief as sought for in the earlier writ petition, which is not a proper course of action and hence, the writ petition is not maintainable.

4. During the course of submissions, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the second respondent has already conducted survey and also found the mistakes/errors in the subject property and final orders will be passed in due course. Page No.3/5

5. The writ petition stands dismissed, accordingly. However, the second respondent is directed to complete the proceedings as expeditiously as possible. There shall be no order as to costs. 16.02.2024 Index: Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No ms To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chennai North, Puzhal, Chennai - 600 066.

2.The Tahsildhar, Purasawakkam Taluk, Chennai - 600 003.

Page No.4/5

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

ms 16.02.2024 Page No.5/5