M.Venkatachalam v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 29.07.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN W.P.No.26586 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.22775 of 2016 M.Venkatachalam ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The District Collector, Salem District.
2. The District Revenue Officer, Salem District, Salem.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sankagiri, Salem District.
4. The Tahsildar, Sankagiri Taluk, Sankagiri, Salem District.
... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 14.09.2015, 30.09.2015 and 26.10.2015 and pass orders recording the name of the petitioner, his mother Perumaye, his late brother's wife Kalaiselvi and his late brother's daughter Indhumathi in the 'A' Register as the owner of the lands situated in S.Nos.99/12, 100/5, 155/8, 10, 15, 17, 22 in Morur Bit I Village bearing Village No.46, Sangagiri Taluk, Salem District.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Jenasenan For Respondents : Mr.R.A.S.Senthilvel, Additional Government Pleader
O R D E R
By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.
2. The petitioner claims to be the successor in title in respect of the properties comprised in S.Nos.99/12, 100/5, 155/8, 10, 15, 17, 22 in Morur Bit I Village bearing Village
No.46, Sangagiri Taluk, Salem District and in the "A" Register, the name of the petitioner's grand father is clearly reflected. It is further stated by the petitioner that the Government of Tamil Nadu has introduced UDR Scheme in the year 1985, for the purpose of updating the revenue records and the Government of Tamil Nadu while updating the revenue records in the year 1985, a mistake had crept in in the "A" Register and the ownership of the land referred to above had been changed from the name of the petitioner's grandfather to six other individuals viz., his brothers and sisters and according to the petitioner, the said change has been effected without any basis for reasons. The petitioner, on coming to know, had submitted a detailed representation dated 14.09.2015 to the respondents to rectify the mistake and since no response is forthcoming, submitted reminders dated 30.09.2015 and 26.10.2015 and despite that no orders have been passed and therefore, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court by filing this Writ Petition.
3. Heard the submissions of Mr.A.Jenasenan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.R.A.S.Senthilvel, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
4. Though the petitioner prayed for larger relief, this Court in the light of the facts and circumstances and without going into the merits of the same, directs the fourth respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 14.09.2015 and the reminders dated 30.09.2015 and 26.10.2015 in accordance with law, after putting on notice the persons concerned and pass orders within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioner as well as to the persons concerned.
5. This Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vsm To
1. The District Collector, Salem District.
2. The District Revenue Officer, Salem District, Salem.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sankagiri, Salem District.
4. The Tahsildar, Sankagiri Taluk, Sankagiri, Salem District.
+1cc to Mr.A.Jenasenan, Advocate, S.R.No.43262 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.43300 Writ Petition No.26586 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.22775 of 2016 RP(CO) CA(24/08/2016)