V.Ravi v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.09.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN V.Ravi ... Petitioner -Vs1. The District Collector, Kancheepuram District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kancheepuram District.

3. The Tahsildar, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram District.

4. The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Thavakozhunthu Eswara Temple, Mel Padappai village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

5. Kumar

...Respondents

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 to consider the representation dated 09.02.2019 made by the Petitioner for cancelling the revenue entires made in the Adangal records in OLD S.NO. S.NO.502/1 New Survey No.605/11, Padapai village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District measuring to an extent of 100 square metre.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Sundaravadanam For R1 to R3 : Mr.G.Velu Additional Government Pleader For R4 : Mr.N.Sathyamoorthi O RDER This Writ Petition has been filed for direction directing the respondent nos.1 to 3 to consider the representation dated 09.02.2019 made by the petitioner for cancelling the revenue entires made in the Adangal records in OLD S.NO.S.NO.502/1 New Survey No.605/11, Padapai village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District measuring to an extent of 100 square metre.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents 1 to 3 and the learned counsel for the fourth respondent and perused the materials available on record.

3. According to the learned counsel for the fourth respondent, the entire subject land is owned by the Temple and the petitioner is a tenant. Therefore, there is a title dispute in respect of the subject property. Hence, the petitioner ought to have approached the Civil Court for appropriate relief to ascertain the right over the property. Only after the declaration of the title in his favour, the petitioner can approach the revenue authorities for cancellation of revenue

entries in respect of the subject property. Therefore, the representation submitted by the petitioner cannot be considered.

4. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that all the documents stand in the name of the petitioner except the adangal extract.

5. In view of the above, the second respondent is directed to conduct enquiry on the representation submitted by the petitioner, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned, pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

16.09.2025 Internet: Yes Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order mn G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J, mn

To

1. The District Collector, Kancheepuram District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kancheepuram District.

3. The Tahsildar, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram District.

4. The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Thavakozhunthu Eswara Temple, Mel Padappai village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

16.09.2025