G.Jayaraman v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :02.11.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.No.43467 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.25088 of 2018

1. G. Jayaraman

2. Mrs. Damayandhi .. Petitioners Vs.

1. The District Collector, Cuddalore.

2. The Tahsildar, Kurinchipadi, Cuddalore District.

3. The Village Administrative Officer, Vadakuthu Village, Vadalur, Cuddalore District.

4. S.P.Rajendran

5. Senthilmurugan

6. Mahalakshmi ..Respondents 1/5

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to cancel the patta bearing No.1964, relating to the property comprised in Survey No.19/2B, 2B1 of Vadakuthu Village, Vadalur, Kurinchipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District issued by the second respondent and consequently direct the second respondent to issue patta to the petitioners jointly and pass orders.

For Petitioner : Mr.K. Sundararaj For Respondents 1 and 3 : Mr. U. Baranidharan For Respondents 3 to 6 : Tapal returned

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to cancel the patta bearing No.1964, relating to the property comprised in Survey No.19/2B, 2B1 of Vadakuthu Village, Vadalur, Kurinchipadi Taluk, Cuddalore District issued by the second respondent and consequently direct the second respondent to issue patta to the petitioners

2. The case of the petitioners are that the subject land were alloted to their father one Govindan under the Welfare Scheme of Adi 2/5

Dravidar Welfare by the Revenue Department. After the demise of the said Govindan mother of the petitioners was in possession of the property and after her demise the petitioners were in possession of the subject lands. Whileso, the the private respondents alleged obtained the patta in their favour from the second respondent. The grievance of the petitioners are that the second respondent without verifying the original records issued patta to the private respondents. Therefore, to cancel the same the petitioners have filed this writ petition.

3. Since no adverse order is passed against the private respondents notice to private respondents dispensed with.

4. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

5. On perusal of records this Court finds that even though the petitioners claim that they have right over the subject property they have not produced any records to substantiate their claim. Thus the writ petitioners have not established even a semblance of legal right, so as to consider the relief, as such sought for in the present petition. 3/5

6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

02.11.2022 smn Speaking Order/ Non Speaking Order Index: Yes/ No Internet: Yes/ No To

1. The District Collector, Cuddalore.

2. The Tahsildar, Kurinchipadi, Cuddalore District.

3. The Village Administrative Officer, Vadakuthu Village, Vadalur, Cuddalore District.

| 4/5

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

smn W.P.No.43467 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.25088 of 2018 02.11.2022 5/5