Immanuvel v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH and WMP No.15991 of 2025 Immanuvel ...Petitioner

Versus

1.The District Collector, Ranipet District.

2.The Tahsildar, Arakkonam Taluk, Ranipet District. ...Respondents Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent dated 29.11.2023 sent through mobile online rejecting the petitioner's application and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to transfer the patta in respect of property having an extent of 1500 sq.ft. bearing Plot No,67, comprised in S.No.524/3A(part), S.No.524/3B, 524//3C, Vadamambakkam Village, Arakkonam Taluk known as Green Park Avenue after subdividing the same in the name of the petitioner, on the basis of the petitioner's application dated 10.08.2023 in the light of judgment of this Court made in A.S.No.108 of 1991 dated 26.11.01.

1/5

For the Petitioner :

Mr.G.Jeremiah For the Respondents :

Mr.P.Sathish Additional Government Pleader for R1 and R2

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned online rejection order passed by the second respondent dated 29.11.2023 and for a consequential direction to the respondents to transfer the patta in the name of the petitioner with respect to the subject property.

2. Heard Mr.G.Jeremiah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.P.Sathish, Additional Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

3. The application submitted by the petitioner seeking for patta has been rejected through the online rejection order dated 29.11.2023 on the ground that the subject property in Survey No.524/3C has been classified as a Panchami land.

2/5

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the land cannot be classified as a Panchami land in view of the judgment passed by the competent civil court and also due to the fact that patta originally stood in the name of the predecessor in title. Learned counsel also placed reliance upon the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.2541 of 2013 dated 21.04.2014.

5. In the considered view of this Court, if the second respondent had any clarifications, a notice should have been issued to the petitioner to enable the petitioner to submit all the relevant documents before the second respondent. Instead, the second respondent has passed the online rejection order, without assigning any reason and by merely stating that the lands in question are Panchami lands. Whereas there are materials to show that the lands stood in the name of private individuals.

6. In the light of the above discussion, the impugned online rejection order dated 29.11.2023 passed by the second respondent is hereby quashed. 3/5

The matter is remanded back to the file of the second respondent and the second respondent is directed to conduct an enquiry and afford opportunity to the petitioner to submit all relevant documents. Thereafter, the final order shall be passed, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. In the result, the writ petition is allowed with the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

22.04.2025 Index: Yes/no mrn To 1.The District Collector, Ranipet District.

2.The Tahsildar, Arakkonam Taluk, Ranipet District.

4/5

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

(mrn) and WMP No.15991 of 2025 22.04.2025 5/5