Arumugam v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :05.07.2022 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI Arumugam ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, O/o.District Collectorate, 2.The District Revenue Officer, O/o.The District Revenue Office, 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o.The Revenue Divisional Office, Sangagiri, Edappadi Taluk,

4. The Tahsildar, O/o.The Tahsildar Office, Edappadi Taluk, 5.The Village Administrative Officer, O/o.The Village Administrative Office, Adayur Village, Edappadi Taluk, ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 3rd respondent to enquire 1/6

petitioner appeal dated 15.11.2021 after recording petitioner statement and pass appropriate order to include petitioner name in Patta No.253 in Survey No.61/1C admeasuring of 0.38.5 Hector land situated in Aadaiyur Village, Edappadi Taluk, Salem District.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Mohan For Respondents : Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja Government Advocate

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to direct the 3rd respondent to enquire petitioner appeal dated 15.11.2021 after recording petitioner statement and pass appropriate order to include petitioner name in Patta No.253 in Survey No.61/1C admeasuring of 0.38.5 Hector land situated in Aadaiyur Village, Edappadi Taluk, Salem District.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the owner of the property in the Survey No.61/1C in Patta No.253 admeasuring about 0.38.5 hector land situated in Aadaiyur Village, Edapaddi Taluk, Salem District. Mistakenly, the name of the petitioner was not mentioned in the patta of the aforesaid property. He made an representation before the 4th respondent for the inclusion of his name in the revenue record. However, this representation 2/6

was rejected by the 4th respondent. Against which, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 3rd respondent. However, till date, the 3rd respondent had not passed any orders, which leads the petitioner to file this writ petition.

3. Though very many grounds have been raised in this Writ Petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would suffice if this Court issues direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner, dated 15.11.2020, after providing opportunity to the aggrieved persons, and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a particular time frame to be fixed by this Court.

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents has no objection for said order being passed.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

6. Taking into consideration the factual aspects of the matter, this Court without going into the merits of the case, directs the 3rd respondent to consider the petitioner's appeal dated 15.11.2021 and pass appropriate 3/6

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.

7. With the above observations and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

05.07.2022 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Speaking order / Nonspeaking order nsa To 1.The District Collector, O/o.District Collectorate, 2.The District Revenue Officer, O/o.The District Revenue Office, 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o.The Revenue Divisional Office, Sangagiri, Edappadi Taluk, 4/6

4. The Tahsildar, O/o.The Tahsildar Office, Edappadi Taluk, 5.The Village Administrative Officer, O/o.The Village Administrative Office, Adayur Village, Edappadi Taluk, 5/6

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

nsa 05.07.2022 6/6