N.T.Ravi v. The Tahsildar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.07.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ and W.M.P. No.28182 of 2025 1.N.T.Ravi 2.R.Mahalakshmi Petitioner(s) Vs The Tahsildar Office of the Tahsildar, Kalavai Kalavai Taluk, Ranipet District.
Respondent(s) PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the petitioners' representation dated 20.6.2025, which was received by the respondent on 23.06.2025 wherein the petitioners have requested for assigning 1 Acre of land classified as battai which in in the their agricultural holding. For Petitioner(s) : Mr.M.K.Kabir Senior Advocate for Mr.Thomas T.Jacob For Respondent(s) : Mr.P.Sathish Additional Government Pleader 1/6
ORDER
By consent of learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. The present writ petition is filed praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to consider the petitioners' representation dated 20.6.2025.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioners that the property comprised in Survey No.275/17 measuring an extent of 1.03 acres was sold by one Uthirapathi to the 1st petitioner vide sale deed dated 18.11.2019 registered as Document No.2030 of 2019 and the said Uthirapathi sold a further extent of 8.15 acres of land in favour of the 2nd petitioner herein vide sale deed dated 18.11.2019 registered as Document No.2031 of 2019, in the office of SubRegistrar, Kalavai. While so, the petitioner was issued with a notice stating that an extent of 0.71.0 ares comprised in Survey No.279 constitutes poramboke land. It is stated that an extent of 1 acre comprised in Survey No.279 falling within the patta land was in continuous possession and enjoyment of petitioner's predecessors, therefore the petitioner proceeded to submit a representation on 31.01.2025 requesting to grant patta in respect of the land comprised in Survey 2/6
No.279, however the same was not considered. Aggrieved petitioners filed a Writ petition in W.P.No.9482 of 2025 before this Court praying to consider the petitioners' representation dated 31.01.2025, which was disposed of on 24.03.2025 with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation within a period of 12 weeks. While so, it is stated that a writ petition was filed by one Vijayalakshmi in W.P.No.14676 of 2025 alleging encroachment, wherein this Court disposed of the writ petition recording the submissions of the State counsel therein stating that the alleged encroachments would be removed on or before 22.05.2025. Thereafter the land was classified as "Battai". Petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent on 20.06.2025 to assign the said land imposing conditions, however, the same has not been considered by the respondent. Hence this writ petition.
4. At the outset, it is submitted by Mr.P.Sathish, learned Additional Government Pleader for respondents that the appropriate authority before whom the representation ought to be taken out is the District Collector. It is stated that the District Level Committee is the authority to consider the request sought for in the representation dated 20.06.2025. It was further submitted that it may be necessary that the petitioners submit a representation before the District Collector and that if any such representation is made, the same would be considered by the appropriate authority subject to conditions, if any, including 3/6
payment of land cost.
5. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for petitioner would submit that if any land cost ought to be paid for issuance of assignment, he expressed his willingness to pay the appropriate land cost which is fixed by the District committee.
6. In view thereof, the writ petition stands disposed of. It is open to the petitioners to submit a representation before the District Collector. On submission of such representation, District Level Committee would decide whether to assign land or to impose any condition including the payment of land cost in accordance with law and on merits. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any views with regard to the merits of the representation and it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the representation on its own merits and in accordance with law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.
09.07.2025 Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index : Yes/ No mka 4/6
To:
The Tahsildar Office of the Tahsildar, Kalavai Kalavai Taluk, Ranipet District.
5/6
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
mka 09.07.2025 6/6