G.Seenappa v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 27.08.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH WP.No.11321 of 2020 G.Seenappa ... Petitioner - Vs -

1. The District Collector, Collectorate, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri - 635 115.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hosur - 635 109.

3. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Hosur - 635 109.

4. Mary Cathrine, W/o. Mahimainathan, 56-D, Bharathidasan Nagar, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.

... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 21.03.2020 in accordance with law and within a stipulated period.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Govi Ganesan For Respondents : Mr.S.N.Parthasarathy Government Advocate for R1 to R3 ***

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed for the issue of writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 21.03.2020 and deal with the same strictly in accordance with law and pass orders

within the time stipulated by this Court.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the subject property and the property in question is a gramanatham. The further case of the petitioner is that the fourth respondent started claiming ownership over the property and such claim is made on the basis of a patta standing in her name. According to the petitioner, no such patta was granted in favour of the fourth respondent and the fourth respondent had forged and fabricated the patta.

3. The petitioner made a representation to the respondents on 21.03.2020 complaining about the forged patta used by the fourth respondent. Since the same was not considered, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court seeking for appropriate directions.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.N.Parthasarathy, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also the limited relief that has been sought for in this writ petition, there shall be a direction to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the third respondent and bring to the notice of the third respondent the alleged patta issued in favour one Santha, from whom the fourth respondent is claiming a right over the property. On enquiry, if the third respondent finds that no such patta was granted in favour of Santha, the same shall be informed to the petitioner. If it has been really granted patta in favour of Santha, the petitioner has to thereafter work out his remedy in the manner known to law. This process shall be completed within a period of four

(4) weeks from the date of receipt of the representation from the petitioner.

6. This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

To

1. The District Collector, Collectorate, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri - 635 115.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hosur - 635 109.

3. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Hosur - 635 109.

+1cc to Mr.K.Govi Ganesan, Advocate, Sr.No.27942 +1cc to the Government Pleader, Sr.No.28159 WP.No.11321 of 2020 kk (co) rr ii (17/09/2020)