N.Ranjith Kumar v. The Assistant Commissioner
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.10.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI N.Ranjith Kumar
...Petitioner
Vs.
1.
The Assistant Commissioner of Land Revenue Scheme South, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
2.
The Special Tahsildar Land Revenue Scheme, Office of District Collector, Ramanathapuram Post and District.
...Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to dispose the petitioner appeal filed by the petitioner on 04.12.2019 within a stipulated period that may be prescribed by this Hon'ble Court. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Arulselvan For Respondents : Mr.U.Bharanidharan, AGP
O R D E R
The petitioner has filed this Writ petition seeking issuance of a Writ of 1/5
Mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal dated 04.12.2019 filed by the petitioner.
2. The case of the petitioner is that in order to rectify the error occurred in the patta and other revenue records in respect of the property comprised in Old S.No.325/1138-pt, New S.No.115, measuring an extent of 0.0035 cents, the petitioner filed an appeal dated 20.02.2019 before the District Revenue Officer and on receipt of the same, the Tahsildar Town Land Scheme directed the petitioner to approach the 2nd respondent. Pursuant to which, the petitioner sent a petition dated 17.10.2019 to the 2nd respondent, seeking to remove the name of one Lakhmiammal Urajini Bai, which was mistaknly added in the patta in respect of the subject property, however the 2nd respondent has rejected the same on the ground that, the revenue measurement proceedings were already completed in October 2018 and granted liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate appeal before the 1st respondent. Accordingly, the petitioner filed an appeal dated 04.12.2019 before the 1st respondent, however, till date, no orders have been passed on the said appeal. Hence, this Writ petition.
2/5
3. Though very many grounds have been raised, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, it would suffice if this Court issues direction to the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's appeal dated 04.12.2019 within a particular time frame fixed by this Court.
4. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents has no serious objection for the said order being passed and he fairly conceded that the petitioner's appeal dated 04.12.2019 will be considered and appropriate orders will be passed within the time stipulated by this Court.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, directs the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's appeal dated 04.12.2019 on merits and in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and the aggrieved persons if any.
6. This Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. 3/5
17.10.2022 skt Speaking Order : Yes/ No Index : Yes/ No M.DHANDAPANI, J.
skt To 1.
The Assistant Commissioner of Land Revenue Scheme South, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
2.
The Special Tahsildar Land Revenue Scheme, Office of District Collector, Ramanathapuram Post and District.
4/5
17.10.2022 5/5