D.Kasthuri, v. The District Collector,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 03.01.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN W.P.No.27009 of 2013 D.Kasthuri ... Petitioner Vs 1.
The District Collector, Kancheepuram District at Kancheepuram.
2.
The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai.
3.
The Sub Registrar, Guduvanchery.
... Respondents Writ Petition 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 representation dated 08.07.2013, seeking cancellation of the deviously created pattas and other fraudulent documents in respect of the lands to an extent of 7.84 acres comprised in Survey Nos.214, 215/2 to 3, 216 & 222/1 to 4 on merits and as per law and with reference to the 2nd respondent's Circular No.67 of 2011 dated 03.11.2011 and within a time to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court. For Petitioner : Mr.L.Chandrakumar For Respondents : No appearance
O R D E R
[Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM, J.] This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the first respondent to conduct a full fledge enquiry on the basis of the representation dated 08.07.2013 given by the petitioner in
respect of fraudulent pattas and other fraudulent documents and cancel the same by way of issuing Writ of Mandamus. 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended to the effect that the petitioner is the absolute owner of survey numbers mentioned in the petition, but various fraudulent documents and also pattas have been created in respect of survey numbers mentioned in the petition and in order to take appropriate action, the petitioner has given a representation dated 08.07.2013 to the second respondent on the basis of Circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011, but the respondents have not taken action. Under such circumstances, the present writ petition has been filed.
3.It is an admitted fact that Circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011 has already withdrawn by the Government of Tamil Nadu. 4.The main grievance expressed on the side of the petitioner is that even though a representation has been given to the first respondent on 08.07.2013, the first respondent has not at all considered the same.
5.Considering the fact that a representation has been given to the first respondent on 08.07.2013 and the same has not at all been considered so far, this Court is inclined to pass the following order:
In fine, the writ petition is allowed without costs. The first respondent is directed to look into the representation dated 08.07.2013 alleged to have been given by the petitioner and after giving proper opportunities to the persons concerned, pass suitable orders within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar gya To 1.
The District Collector, Kancheepuram District at Kancheepuram.
2.
The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai.
3.
The Sub Registrar, Guduvanchery.
+1cc to Mr.L.Chandrakumar, Advocate, S.R.No.359 W.P.No.27009 of 2013 PA(CO) CS/29/01/18