Madras High CourtWP/10957/2014disposed of

Rajanna v. The District Revenue Officer

2015-02-04Honourable Mr Justice T. S. Sivagnanam3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04.02.2015

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM W.P.No.10957 of 2014 Rajanna

...Petitioner

1. The District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hosur, Krishnagiri District

3. The Tahsildar, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District

4. Venkatasamy Reddy

5. Nanja Reddy

6. Lokesh Babu

...Respondents

Prayer :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 26.02.2014.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.R.Jayaprakash For Respondents :

Mr.R.Vijayakumar for R1 to R3 Additional Government Pleader Mr.P.Subbareddy for R4 to R6

O R D E R

Heard Mr.R.Jayaprakash, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Vijayakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader for first to third respondents and Mr.P.Subba Reddy, learned counsel for the fourth to sixth respondents.

2. The petitioner seeks to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 26.02.2014.

3. According to the petitioner, patta was granted in his favour on 11.11.2010 and 10.10.2013 and all of a sudden, the same has been cancelled and patta has been granted in the names of the respondents 4 to 6. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation on 26.02.2014 to cancel the patta granted in favour of the respondents 4 to 6 and to restore the patta in the name of the petitioner.

4. It is seen that the respondents 4 to 6 have filed a Suit in O.S.No.411 of 2007, which is now pending before the District Munsif Court, Hosur, in the said suit, the private respondents have sought for declaration of the title.

5. In such circumstances, the Revenue officials shall await the decision of the Civil Court and should not effect further mutation and as regards entries in the revenue record, as on record, shall continue to be maintained. It is left open to the petitioner and the respondents 4 to 6 to agitate their title over the property in the pending in O.S.No.411 of 2007. It is made clear they shall not rely upon Patta No.4010, since the allegation is that the patta has been wrongly granted in favour of the respondents 4 to 6, whereas they would allege that patta stood in their name has erroneously changed in the name of the writ petitioner. Hence the parties shall individually establish their title by producing oral and documentary evidence before the civil court. With the above observation, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ssd

1. The District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hosur, Krishnagiri District

3. The Tahsildar, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District 1 CC to Mr.S.R.Jayaprakash, Advocate SR.No. 5971 1 CC to the Government Pleader, SR.No. 6015 1 CC to Mr.P.Subbareddy, Advocate SR.No. 5977 W.P.No.10957 of 2014 LRS (CO) PSI (11.02.2015)