Ramalingam v. The District Collector,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 19.09.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No. 3780 of 2014 Ramalingam

...Petitioner

Vs 1.The District Collector Villupuram District 2.The District Revenue Officer Villupuram District 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer Villupuram District 4.The Tahsildar Ulundurpet ...Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the fourth respondent to issue patta to the petitioner forthwith for his lands as per his petition No. 61 dated 03.06.2013. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Meenal For Respondents : Mr.D.Ragu Government Advocate

O R D E R

The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to direct the fourth respondent to issue patta to the petitioner forthwith as per the petition No.61 dated 03.06.2013.

2. The learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondents made a submission that the relief sought for in the present writ petition cannot be considered, in view of the fact that, the Tahsildar already considered the representation submitted by the writ petitioner in his proceeding dated 03.06.2017 and passed the final orders dated 23.12.2013. The said order was communicated to the writ petitioner. However, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner disputes the same by stating that the said order dated 23.12.2013 was not communicated to the writ petitioner at all.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. The writ petition was filed on 07.02.2014 and till such time, no such order had been served to the writ petitioner. May that be this Court is of an opinion that now it is brought to the knowledge of this Court that the claim of the writ petitioner was rejected by passing an order by the Tashildar on 23.12.2013. Thus, it is left open to the writ petitioner to challenge the same in the manner known to law by preferring an appeal before the competent authority under the provisions of the Patta Pass Book Act. In the event of preferring any such appeal, the Competent authority is at liberty consider the same by condoning the delay from the date on which the writ petition was filed on 07.12.2014.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. Copy of the order is now served to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. However no order as to costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IX) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar kmm/rst To 1.The District Collector Villupuram District 2.The District Revenue Officer Villupuram District 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer Villupuram District 4.The Tahsildar Ulundurpet.

+1cc to Mr.R.Meenal, Advocate, S.R.No.65230 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.65523 W.P.No. 3780 of 2014 MG(CO) rrs 10/10/2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/