T.Dhanraj v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 03.09.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY T.Dhanraj ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Salem District.
2.The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Salem District.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Salem District.
4.The Thasildar, Office of the Thasildar, Athur, Salem District.
... Respondents Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to make necessary changes in the revenue records and issue patta in the petitioner name based on the representation dated 01.02.2024. 1/6
For Petitioner : Ms.P.Gowri for Mr.V.T.Srinivasan For Respondents : Mr.P.Ganesan, Government Advocate
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to direct the second respondent to make necessary changes in the revenue records and issue patta in the petitioner name based on the representation dated 01.02.2024.
2. Mr.P.Ganesan, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission itself.
3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner purchased a property in Survey No.65/12, measuring an extent of 1.75.0 Hectare and Patta No.672, situated at Thiyaganur puthur Village, Salem District from one Kathaan and others. In this circumstances, the above said property was wrongly mentioned as common pathway (vandi pathai) in the revenue records. Thus, the petitioner made several representation to rectify the same and to issue patta on his favour. However, no order was 2/6
passed. Therefore, he sent another representation dated 01.02.2024 to the respondents 1 & 2, which was also not considered by the respondents, till date. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.
4. Though many grounds have been raised in this writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would suffice, if this Court issues direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 01.02.2024.
5. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner's representation dated 01.02.2024 would be considered and orders passed within a time frame that may be fixed by this Court.
6. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
7. Considering the limited relief sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court without going into the merits of the case, 3/6
directs the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 01.02.2024 on merits and in accordance with law, after giving due notice and opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner as well as aggrieved persons, if any, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
List this case on 31.10.2025 under the caption "For Reporting Compliance".
03.09.2025 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No vm To 4/6
1.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Salem District.
2.The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Salem District.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Salem District.
4.The Thasildar, Office of the Thasildar, Athur, Salem District.
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J., vm 5/6
03.09.2025 6/6