Ibrahim Sahib, v. The District Revenue Officer,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 07.02.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM Writ Petition No.23521 of 2014 Ibrahim Sahib

...Petitioner

-Vs1.The District Revenue Officer, Collectorate, Krishnagiri.

2.The Sub-Collector, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

3.The Tahsildar, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

4.K.Ranganathan (died) 5.Kalaiselvi 6.Pradeep 7.Bhoopathy

...Respondents

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent herein to consider and pass order on the representation of the petitioner dated 13.05.2014 within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.

For petitioner :

Mr.K.Govi Ganesan For Respondents:

M/s.A.Sri Jayanthi Special Government Pleader (for R.1 to R.3) R.4 - Died No appearance for R.5 to R.7

ORDER

Heard Mr.K.Govi Ganesan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.A.Sri Jayanthi, learned Special Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3.

2.The notice sent to the private respondents has been served and their names have been printed in the cause list, one of whom is no more namely the fourth respondent and his legal heirs have been brought on record. The petitioner seeks for a direction upon the first respondent to consider his representation dated 13.05.2014, wherein the petitioner prays for rectification of an error which had occurred in the patta. 3.According to the petitioner, one Abdul Rahaman Saheb sold his plot to the fourth respondent and instead of transferring his name from his vendors patta, the third respondent transferred the petitioner's patta bearing No.35 in the name of the fourth respondent.

The petitioner came to know about it when he applied for Computer Patta and the petitioner immediately given rectification of mistake which was acknowledged in Receipt No.81. Since, no action was taken on that request, the petitioner submitted representation dated 13.05.2014 and sent the same by Registered Post which has been received in the Office of the respondent. Since, no action has been taken on the rectification of mistake, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. It is not clear as to whether representation has been considered and any orders have been passed. 4.

Be that as it may, if the representation has not been considered and no orders have been passed, this Court is inclined to grant liberty to the petitioner for submitting a fresh representation along with all supportive documents and a copy of this order and submit the same by appearing in person in the Office of the first respondent and on representation being given, the Office of first respondent shall issue a receipt to the petitioner and thereafter fix a date for enquiry in which the fourth respondent and his legal heirs should be put on notice and after hearing both the parties, the first respondent is directed to pass reasoned order and inform the same to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of conclusion of enquiry.

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

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Revenue Officer, Collectorate, Krishnagiri.

2.The Sub-Collector, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

3.The Tahsildar, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

+1cc to Mr.K.Goviganesan, Advocate Sr.10140 W.P.No.23521 of 2014 vg II[co] srg 16/03/2020