← Library
Madras High CourtWP/19943/2015disposed of

S.Pandurangan, v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

2015-07-07Honourable Mr Justice M. Sathyanarayanan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07.07.2015

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN W.P.No.19943 of 2015 S.Pandurangan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvannamalai District,

2. The Tahsildar, Thiruvannamalai District,

3. The Village Administrative Officer, 101, Mangalam Group, Thiruvannamalai District,

4. Mrs.Lakshmi ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 12.05.2015 and thereby the 1st respondent taking necessary action to canceling the mistakable patta entries in petitioner's survey No.764/11 and 764/12, and further directing the 2nd respondent to issuance of patta in the above survey Numbers. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Sakthivel For Respondents : Mrs.P.Rajalakshmi, Government Advocate for RR.1 to 3

ORDER

By consent of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 3, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. The petitioner claiming to be the owner of the property at Mangalam village in Old Survey No.170/1A and New Survey No.764/11 and 764/12 by means of registered sale deed dated 20.2.2008 registered as https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

document No.2104 of 2008 on the file of Sub-Registrar, Mangalam. He approached the 2nd respondent for issuance of patta and having found that some wrong entries have been made, the petitioner also approached the 1st respondent in the form of a representation dated 20.9.2013 followed by another representation dated 12.5.2015. Since no orders have been passed on the said representations, the petitioner has come forward before this Court with the present writ petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms.P.Rajalakshmi, learned Government Advocate, who accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3.

4. This Court, in the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits of the claim projected by the petitioner, directs the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 12.5.2015 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, after putting on notice the petitioner as well as the 4th respondent and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioner as well as the 4th respondent.

5. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. However, there is no order as to costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar usk To

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvannamalai District

2. The Tahsildar, Thiruvannamalai District

3. The Village Administrative Officer, 101, Mangalam Group, Thiruvannamalai District +1cc to Mr.G.Sakthivel, Advocate, S.R.No.33893 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.34353 W.P.No.19943 of 2015 RV(CO) CA(15/07/2015) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/