Madras High CourtWP/16038/2025disposed of

Jayalakshmi @P.V.Neela v. The District Collector

2025-06-02Honourable Mr Justice Mohammed Shaffiq5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 02.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ and W.M.P.No.18145 of 2025 Jayalakshmi @ P.V.Neela ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector District Collectorate Office, Krishnagiri District.

2. The District Revenue Officer DRO Office, Krishnagiri District.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer RDO Office, Krishnagiri District.

4. The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Krishnagiri District.

5. The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar Tahsildar Office, Krishnagiri District.

6. The Village Administrative Officer VAO Office, Pollupalli Village, Krishnagiri District.

7. Aravind ... Respondents 1/5

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the impugned order issued by the third respondent in D.R.2024/31/05/000437SD dated 23.12.2024, quash the same and consequently direct the Respondent No.3 to restore the patta No. 2732 originally issued to the land comprised in Old Survey No.195/6 New Survey No. 195/6A Pollupalli Village, Krishnagiri District.

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.B.M.Subash For Respondent(s) : Mr.P.Sathish Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

By consent of learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. In view of the order that this Court proposes to pass and also the limited relief that is sought to be granted, notice to the 7th respondent is dispensed with.

2. The present writ petition is filed praying for writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the impugned order issued by the third respondent in D.R.2024/31/05/000437SD, dated 23.12.2024, quash the same and consequently direct the Respondent No.3 to restore the patta No.2732 originally issued to the land comprised in Old Survey No.195/6 New Survey No. 195/6A Pollupalli Village, Krishnagiri District.

2/5

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that without issuing notice to the petitioner there has been sub division of pattas. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order dated 23.12.2024 is a non speaking order and does not assign any reason.

4. At the outset, it was submitted by Mr.P.Sathish, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents that they would redo the proceedings inasmuch he would agree that the impugned order is in fact a non speaking order, which was readily accepted by the learned counsel for petitioner.

5. In view thereof, the matter is remanded back to the appropriate respondent to redo the entire proceedings in accordance with law after putting the petitioner, 3rd respondent and any other interested parties/rival claimants on notice and after affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of hearing. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any views with regard to the merits of the case and it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the matter on its own merits and in accordance with law. 3/5

6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 02.06.2025 Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index : Yes/ No spp To: