M.Veerappan v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 22.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN M.Veerappan ... Petitioner -Vs1. The District Collector, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.
2. The District Revenue Officer, Collectorate Complex, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.
3. The Revenue Divisional Office, Dharmapuri Revenue Division, Dharmapuri.
4. The Tahsildar, Pennagaram Taluk, Dharmapuri District.
5. Gopal
6. Subramani
7. Karuppu Chetty
8. Alagesan
9. Annamalai
10. Govindan
11. Basavan
12. Madhu
13. Ayyavu
14. Palani
15. Sivakami
16. Nanjammal
17. Lakshmi
18. Kamatchi ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 herein to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 28.08.2018 and its reminder dated 28.06.2024 by providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as to all the individual respondents herein within the time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Thirumavalavan For R1 to R4 : Mr.S.Rajesh Government Advocate
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for direction directing the respondents 1 to 3 herein to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 28.08.2018 and its reminder dated 28.06.2024.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 4 and perused the materials available on record.
3. A perusal of records revealed that originally the petitioner was
assigned with the subject land comprised in S.No.601/2, ad-measuring 1.31.00 hectares, situated at Kodupatti Hamlet, Vattuvanahalli Revenue Village, Dharmapuri District, by the proceedings dated 30.04.1987. Subsequently, it was cancelled and allotted in favour of the respondents 5 to 18 herein.
4. Now, the petitioner submitted a representation seeking cancellation of patta issued in favour of the respondents 5 to 18 herein. The petitioner submitted a representation instead of challenging the patta in the manner known to law. Therefore, the representation submitted by the petitioner seeking restoration of patta in favour of the petitioner cannot be considered.
5. In view of the above, the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 22.10.2025 Internet: Yes Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order mn G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J, mn
To
1. The District Collector, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.
2. The District Revenue Officer, Collectorate Complex, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.
3. The Revenue Divisional Office, Dharmapuri Revenue Division, Dharmapuri.
4. The Tahsildar, Pennagaram Taluk, Dharmapuri District.
22.10.2025