C.Settu v. The District Revenue Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY C.Settu ..Petitioner(s) Vs.

1. The District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri District , Krishnagiri.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hosur, Krishnagiri District

3. The Tahsildar, Anchetty Taluk Office, Krishnagiri District.

..Respondent(s) Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for records of the 1st Respondent passed in Na.Ka.28086/2017/J-2 dated 26.07.2019 quash the same and consequently, direct the 1st Respondent to rectify the errors crept in the revenue records in respect of the lands measuring an extent of 1.93 Acres comprised in Survey No.325/5, situate at No. 81, Thagatty Village, Denkanikottai Taluk, Krishnagiri District and issue patta to the petitioner within the time to be stipulated by this Honourable Court. For Petitioner(s):

Ms.R.DivyaPreathika For Respondent(s):

Mr.T.K.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 26.09.2019 and for a direction to the 1st Respondent to rectify the errors crept in the revenue records in respect of the lands measuring an extent of 1.93 Acres comprised in Survey No.325/5, situate at No. 81, Thagatty Village, Denkanikottai Taluk, Krishnagiri District and issue patta to the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been living in the subject property since 1985. D.Namuna, patta and adangal was also issued in the year 1989. However, in the revenue records, it appears that the survey number of the petitioner's property as Survey No.325/1 instead of Survey No.325/5. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation dated 14.10.2017 for the purpose of making correction in the revenue records but, the respondent refused to make any correction citing reason that no corrections can be made as sought by the petitioner since the survey number of the petitioner's property is 325/1. Hence, the present writ petition is filed.

3. When this matter was came up for hearing on 23.03.2026, the Tahsildar/ 3rd respondent was directed to find out with regard to the survey number in which the petitioner is residing. Pursuant to the same, the Tahsildar is present today and also filed a status report. By referring the Tahsildar's

report, the learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that the there is no such S.No.325/5 and also the petitioner is not residing at Survey No.325/1, one Nethaji, who is the cousin brother of the petitioner is residing at S.No.325/1.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents and perused the material available on record.

5. In the present case, as per the revenue records, no such Survey No.325/5 is available. There are only three sub-division numbers provided for Survey No.325 i.e., 325/1, 325/2 and 325/3. When the matter was came up for hearing on 23.03.2026, this Court passed the following order:- "This Court directs the third respondent to measure the petitioner's property and file a report, which must contain the survey numbers. Further, the third respondent is directed to appear before this Court on the next date of hearing, along with the said report.

2. List the case on 30.03.2026."

6. Based on the direction issued by this Court, the property was measured and the 3rd respondent/ Tahsildar appeared before this Court and filed a status report, wherein it is stated that petitioner is in possession of Survey No.325/1

and not Survey No.325/5. Even in the revenue records, no such sub-division has ever been made therefore, no such correction can be made as sought for by the petitioner.

7. Therefore, while holding that the petitioner is residing at Survey No.325/1 through his Cousin, this Court does not find any merit in this writ petition. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. In the event the petitioner resides since 1980, it is up to him to make appropriate application for the purpose of Chitta and Adangal.

8. In view of the dismissal of this writ petition, the presence of the Tahsildar is dispensed with.

30-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order KKN

To

1. The District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri District , Krishnagiri.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hosur, Krishnagiri District

3. The Tahsildar, Anchetty Taluk Office, Krishnagiri District.

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

KKN 30-03-2026