M.Sekar v. The Chairman

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 18.04.2024 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SENTHILKUMAR M.Sekar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Chairman, State Level Scrutiny Committee-II/ Additional Secretary to Government, Adi Dravida and Tribal Welfare (CV 3) Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.

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

4.The Tahsildar, Pochampalli, Krishnagiri District.

... Respondents

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to rectify the details given by the Tahsildar, Pochampalli, Krishnagiri District, the 4th respondent herein, in the Family Tree of the petitioner, as to the names of the petitioner's paternal uncle as Mr.Pallan instead of China thaai and Sivasakthi instead of Sakthi based on his representation dated 29.08.2023. For Petitioner :

Mr.A.R.Suresh For Respondents :

Mr.G.Nanmaran Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by S.S. SUNDAR, J.) This writ petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to rectify the details given by the Tahsildar, Pochampalli, Krishnagiri District, the 4th respondent herein, in the Family Tree of the petitioner, as to the names of the petitioner's paternal uncle as Mr.Pallan instead of China thaai and Sivasakthi instead of Sakthi, based on his representation dated 29.08.2023.

2.Even though a positive direction is sought for in the writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 29.08.2023. The petitioner has grievance about the error in the Genealogy Tree that has been drawn by the Tahsildar/4th respondent. The petitioner wants to correct the mistake and hence, submitted a representation to the respondents. 3.Having regard to the limited scope of the prayer that is now sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioner before this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's contention in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition, the 4th respondent/Tahsildar is directed to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner, dated 29.08.2023, and pass appropriate orders, if necessary after holding an enquiry, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. (S.S.S.R., J.) (N.S., J.) 18.04.2024 mkn Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No To 1.The Chairman, State Level Scrutiny Committee-II/ Additional Secretary to Government, Adi Dravida and Tribal Welfare (CV 3) Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The District Collector, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.

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

4.The Tahsildar, Pochampalli, Krishnagiri District.

S.S. SUNDAR , J.

and N. SENTHILKUMAR, J.

mkn 18.04.2024