P.Murugesan v. District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.08.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR P.Murugesan ... Petitioner vs.
1.District Collector, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.
2.The District Revenue Officer, O/o. District Collectorate, Dharmapuri District.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.
4.The Tahsildar, Nallampalli Taluk, Dharmapuri District.
5.The Village Administrative Officer, Pangunatham Village, Nallampalli Taluk, Dharmapuri District.
1/6
6.Subramani 7.Kamalesan 8.Mari 9.Govindammal 10.P.Maadhu 11.P.Murugan 12.P.Muthu 13.Mariappan ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to pass orders on the appeal dated 05.07.2024 by quash the order dated 07.06.2024 on the file of the 2nd respondent and consequently, direct the 4th respondent to issue fresh joint patta by including the name of the petitioner's father S.Periyagounder for the S.Nos.98/3, 4, 5, 6B, 8, 9A, 9B, 11B, 11C and 12B at Pankunatham Village, Nallampalli Taluk, Dharmapuri District. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Varatharajan For R1 to R5 : Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
2/6
The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the 1st respondent to pass orders on an appeal filed by the petitioner dated 05.07.2024 seeking review of the order passed by the District Revenue Officer on 07.06.2024.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the property situated in S.Nos.98/3, 4, 5, 6B, 8, 9A, 9B, 11B, 11C and 12B at Pankunatham Village, Nallampalli Taluk, Dharmapuri District originally belong to the grandfather of the petitioner and after death of his grandfather, the patta was issued in the name of his legal representatives excluding petitioner's father namely Periyagounder. Therefore, he made a representation to the 4th respondent and his representation was rejected by the 4th respondent. Challenging the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 3rd respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer. The appeal was also dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred a revision before the 2nd respondent and the same was dismissed relegating the parties to approach the Civil Court. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred a representation before the 1st respondent seeking review of the order passed by the 2nd respondent.
3. The representation filed by the petitioner seeking review of the 3/6
order passed by the 2nd respondent is not at all maintainable and therefore, the direction sought for in this writ petition cannot be issued. The 2nd respondent/Revisional Authority in his order relegated the parties to approach the Civil Court.
4. In view of the same, the petitioner is permitted to approach the Civil Court and establish his right over the suit property in the manner known to law.
5. With this observation, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
05.08.2024 Index : Yes/No Speaking order:Yes/No dm 4/6
To 1.District Collector, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.
2.The District Revenue Officer, O/o. District Collectorate, Dharmapuri District.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.
4.The Tahsildar, Nallampalli Taluk, Dharmapuri District.
5.The Village Administrative Officer, Pangunatham Village, Nallampalli Taluk, Dharmapuri District.
5/6
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
dm 05.08.2024 6/6