Arulappan v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.07.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ Arulappan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.
The District Collector, Kallakurichi District.
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thirukoilur, Kallakurichi District.
The Tahsildar, Ulundurpet, Kallakurichi District.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking for an issuance of writ of mandamus, to direct the respondents to mutate the nature of land in Survey No.220/4, measuring an extent of 4.41 cents, Pugaipatty Village, Ulundurpet Taluk, Kallakurichi District from Tharisu to the name of the petitioner based on the recommendation of the Tahsildar, Ulundurpet dated 27.01.2025 in proceedings Na.Ka.A2/14/2025. For Petitioner : M/s.R.Poornima For Respondents : Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader
ORDER
By consent of learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. The present writ petition is filed praying for a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to change / alter the nature of land comprised in Survey No.220/4, measuring to an extent of 4.41 cents, situated at Pugaipatty Village, Ulundurpet Taluk, Kallakurichi District from Tharisu to the name of the petitioner, based on the recommendation of the Tahsildar, Ulundurpet dated 27.01.2025, in proceedings Na.Ka.A2/14/2025. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the subject property comprised in Survey No.220/4, measuring an extent of 4 acres and 41 cents, situated at Pugaipatti Village, Ulundurpet Taluk, Kallakurichi District was purchased by petitioner's grand mother viz., Tmt.
Selvambal, vide Sale Deed dated 11.06.1931 registered as Document No.972 of 1931. Petitioner's father was doing agricultural work in the subject land till his death. Thereafter, agricultural work in the subject property was stopped.
"Tharisu". While so, petitioner was served with the proceedings of the Tahsildar in Na.Ka.A2/14/2025 dated 27.01.2025, whereby after conducting detailed enquiry, recommended for mutation of revenue record from Tharisu to Pattadars name. Despite the recommendation of the Tahsildar, no further action has been taken by the respondents till date. Hence the petitioner has come before this Court seeking a mandamus to the respondents. 4.
Learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents would submit that the District Revenue Officer is the jurisdictional Authority to carry out any corrections in respect of any errors in UDRs and therefore, it would be appropriate, if the petitioner submit a representation before the District Revenue Officer concerned, the same will be considered in accordance with law.
5.
In view thereof, this Writ Petition stands disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to submit a representation to the District Revenue Officer concerned, who in turn shall consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, after putting the petitioner as well as any other interested parties / rival claimants, if any on notice within a period of
sixteen (16) weeks from the date of receipt of any such representation. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any view with regard to the merits of the case and it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the case on its own merits and in accordance with law. No costs. 17.07.2025 veda Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order To 1.
The District Collector, Kallakurichi District.
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thirukoilur, Kallakurichi District.
The Tahsildar, Ulundurpet, Kallakurichi District.
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
veda 17.07.2025