A.Kuppusamy v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27.04.2022

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.No.10323 of 2022 A.Kuppusamy

...Petitioner

vs.

1. The District Collector, Tiruvannamalai District.

2. The Tahsildar, Jamuna Marathur Taluk, Jamuna Marathur, Tiruvannamalai District.

... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 23.09.2020 seeking to correct the name of the petitioner in the patta.

For Petitioner :

Mr.G.Ramachandiran For Respondents :

Mr.V.Veluchamy Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking for an issuance of a writ of Mandamus to direct the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.09.2020 within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the property comprised in S.No.72/2A ad-measuring 0.27 acres situated at Palamarathur Madura, Jamuna Marathur Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District. Thereafter, Patta bearing No.148 was issued in favour of the petitioner as Santhikarakuppan S/o Annamalai by the Revenue Officials. In order to correct the name in the Patta bearing No.148, petitioner made a representation to

the 1st respondent dated 23.09.2020. Pursuant to which, the 1st respondent forwarded the same to the 2nd respondent to consider the said representation of the petitioner. Out of which, the 2nd respondent made an enquiry and has also given a certificate to the petitioner in Mu.Mu.A2/6028/2020 dated 30.12.2020 stating that the petitioner's name is Kuppusamy @ Santhikarakuppan. However, till date the petitioner's representation was not considered by the 2nd respondent. Hence, he has filed the present Writ Petition seeking the aforesaid relief.

3. Though very many grounds have been raised in this Writ Petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would suffice if this Court issues direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.09.2020 and pass orders on merits within a particular time frame to be fixed by this Court.

4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents has no objection for said order being passed.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

6. Taking into consideration the factual aspects of the matter, this Court without going into the merits of the case, directs the 2nd respondent / Tahsildar to consider the said representation of the petitioner dated 23.09.2020, in the light of certificate dated 30.12.2020 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as aggrieved persons if any, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and it is for the 2nd respondent to decide the same at the time of disposing of the said representation purely on merits.

7. With the above observations and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar rap

To

1. The District Collector, Tiruvannamalai District.

2. The Tahsildar, Jamuna Marathur Taluk, Jamuna Marathur, Tiruvannamalai District.

+1cc to Mr.M.G.Ramachandran, Advocate, S.R.No.29810 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.30439 W.P.No.10323 of 2022 SKM(CO) SU(19/05/2022)