K.R.Dilli, S/O.Ragavachari, v. The District Revenue Officer,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 27.08.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P.No.21780 of 2018 K.R.Dilli .. Petitioner Vs 1.The District Revenue Officer, 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kancheepuram, 3.The Tahsildar, O/o.Uthiramerur Taluk, 4.Tmt.Amrose Mary .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to change the revenue records pertaining to the petitioner's property situated at Manambathy Kandigai Village, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram District in Survey No.430/6, admeasuring to an extent of 358 square metres comprised in joint patta in patta No.539 in view of the appeal order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.21613/2016/N3, dated 12.10.2017 forthwith on the basis of the representation dated 04.07.2018.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Magesh Kumar For Respondents : Mrs.P.Rajalakshmi Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R3

O R D E R

Mrs.P.Rajalakshmi, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents 1 to 3. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. The petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for a mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to

change the revenue records pertaining to his property situated at Manambathy Kandigai Village, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram District in Survey No.430/6, based on the order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.21613/2016/N3, dated 12.10.2017, by considering his representation dated 04.07.2018.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the property in Survey No.430/6 situated at Manambathy Kandigai Village, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram District, measuring to an extent of 358 sq.mts has been allotted by the Government under UDR scheme. At the time of issuance of free patta some discrepancies have been occurred in the Revenue Records, due to which the fourth respondent has encroached some extent of the petitioner's land. Hence he approached the second respondent and after due enquiry, the second respondent directed the third respondent to rectify the mistakes occurred in the patta, and in the appeal before the first respondent on 06.09.2016. The first respondent by his proceedings dated 12.10.2017, directed the third respondent to take necessary action, but, the same was not considered. Hence, the present writ petition.

4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 submitted that the representation of the petitioner would be considered on merits and in accordance with law.

5. In the light of the limited scope of the matter, having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 04.07.2018 based on the order of the first respondent referred supra and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, fourth respondent as well as other necessary parties, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- Deputy Registrar //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ms To 1.The District Revenue Officer,

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kancheepuram, 3.The Tahsildar, O/o.Uthiramerur Taluk, +1cc to Mr.G. Mageshkumar, Advocate SR.No.59071 +1cc to Government Pleader SR.No.58841 W.P.No.21780 of 2018 GMY(12/09/2018)