K. Kanchana v. The Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY K. Kanchana D/o b. Kandasamy, No 51-K, Appavoo nagar, Dharamapuri 636 701 ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Collector District Collectorate office, Chengalpattu

2. The District Revenue officer Chengalpattu

3. The Revenue Divisional officer Chenglapattu

4. The Tahsildar Cheyyur Taluk, Chengalput District ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 4th respondent relating to the impugned order passed in

Application No 2026 / 0105 / 35 / 005419 dated 12.05.2026 and quash the same and consequently direct the 4th respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner for sub division patta transfer in the name of the petitioner. For Petitioner(s):

Mr. Tarun Krishna For Respondent(s):

Mrs.Inthu Karunakaran Government Counsel

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 4th respondent relating to the impugned order passed in Application No 2026 / 0105 / 35 / 005419 dated 12.05.2026 and quash the same and consequently direct the 4th respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner for sub division patta transfer in the name of the petitioner.

2. The petitioner's case is that he submitted an online application (No. 2026/0105/35/005419) for a sub-division patta transfer, which the fourth respondent mechanically rejected. Challenging this rejection order, the petitioner has approached this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order was passed by the 4th respondent without conducting a proper field enquiry or affording an opportunity of hearing, and that the same is a cryptic, non-speaking order. Therefore, the same is in violation of the principles of natural justice and is liable to be set aside on this ground alone.

4. The learned Government Counsel appearing for the respondents fairly submitted that the impugned order may be set aside and the matter may be remitted back to the 4th respondent for fresh consideration, with a direction to pass appropriate orders after issuing due notice to all the parties concerned.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side, this Court is of the view that the impugned order has been passed without conducting a proper enquiry and without affording a fair and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to put forth his case, which is a clear violation of the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 12.05.2026 passed by the 4th respondent is hereby set aside. Consequently, this Court inclines to remand the matter to the 4th respondent for fresh consideration, and the matter is accordingly remitted back to the 4th respondent. The 4th respondent is directed to

consider the application of the petitioner afresh, after issuing notice to the petitioner as well as the counter-parties, if any, and affording them an opportunity of a personal hearing. The 4th respondent shall pass a reasoned speaking order on merits and in accordance with law, by taking into consideration all the relevant materials placed on record, and thereafter effect the sub-division, and patta transfer, if it is otherwise in order, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

30-06-2026 Asi

To

1. The Collector District Collectorate office, Chengalpattu

2. The District Revenue officer Chengalpattu

3. The Revenue Divisional officer Chenglapattu

4. The Tahsildar Cheyyur Taluk, Chengalput District

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

Asi 30-06-2026