K.Settu S/O.Late.Kovai, v. The District Collector,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03.04.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.P.NO.18305 OF 2016 AND W.M.P.NO.16012 OF 2016 K.Settu ...

Petitioner

Versus

1.The District Collector O/o. The District Collector Thiruvannamalai District.

2.The District Revenue Officer Thiruvannamalai Town and Taluk Thiruvannamalai District.

3.The Special Thasildhar Natham Land & Tax Scheme Thukkappettai Post, Chengam Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District.

4.The Executive Engineer Thukkapettai, 5.The Assistant Executive Engineer Thukkapettai, Chengam Town & Taluk, 6.The Junior Engineer Maintenance and Distribution Thukkapettai, Chengam Town & Taluk,

7.R.Thiruvengadom ...

Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the culminate impugned order vide Ka.No./U/PO/EP/TOWN/CHENGAM/Ka.Ko. /A.No.87/2016-17, dated 06.05.2016 issued by the 5th respondent herein and quash the same.

For Petitioner :

Mr.Dalit Tiger C. Ponnusamy For Respondents:

Mr.K.J.Sivakumar 1 to 3 Government Advocate For Respondents 4 to 6 :

Mr.Varunkumar For Respondent 7:

Mr.M.Santhanaraman

O R D E R

The petitioner claiming to be the owner of the property, made an objection for grant of service connection in favour of the seventh respondent. By the impugned order, the petitioner was asked to produce the relevant records, in support of his objection, failing which, service connection will be given.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that UDR patta has been wrongly obtained by the father of the seventh respondent, against which, action has already been taken and the proceedings are pending consideration before the Tahsildar.

3. The learned counsel for the seventh respondent would submit that the property has been purchased in the year 1956 and admittedly, construction has been made over it, decades ago. Patta has been issued in the year 1990. The impugned order is only an intimation to the petitioner asking him to produce the relevant documents, in support of his objection. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be a person aggrieved at this stage.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the documents have already been produced before the fifth respondent.

5. If that is a case, the said respondent has to pass appropriate orders. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed with the above observation. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar TK To 1.The District Collector O/o. The District Collector Thiruvannamalai District.

2.The District Revenue Officer Thiruvannamalai Town and Taluk Thiruvannamalai District.

3.The Special Thasildhar Natham Land & Tax Scheme Thukkappettai Post, Chengam Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District.

4.The Executive Engineer Thukkapettai, 5.The Assistant Executive Engineer Thukkapettai, Chengam Town & Taluk,

6.The Junior Engineer Maintenance and Distribution Thukkapettai, Chengam Town & Taluk, +1cc to Mr.M.Santhanaraman, Advocate Sr.19975 +1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.20465 W.P.NO.18305 OF 2016 rj[co] srg 11/4/2017