M/S.Ashok Kumar Fertilizer v. The District Collector,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 18.10.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN W.P.No.36266/2016 M/s.Ashok Kumar Fertilizer Pvt.Ltd rep.by Managing Director, D.C.A.Ashok Kumar ..

Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

2.The Tahsildar O/o.The Tahsildar Vandavasi Taluk Thiruvannamalai District.

..

Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 18.05.2015 by conducting enquiry and issue patta within the time limit. For Petitioner :

Mr.V.Kasiviswanathan For R1&R2 :

Mr.A.N.Thambi Durai, Spl.GP

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.A.N.Thambi

Durai, learned Special Government Pleader who accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 and with the consent on either side, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. The petitioner would state that he had purchased a landed property admeasuring to an extent of about 42 acres in Kodiyalam Village, Vandavasi Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District out of the Sale Deed executed by the vendors by appointing Mr.R.Devadoss, as the Power Agent and since then, the petitioner was in possession and enjoyment of the entire property without any disturbance. It is his further case that subsequent to the purchase, he had applied for transfer of patta in his name since the revenue documents, viz., patta, chitta, adangal stood in the names of the petitioner's vendors. On 05.12.

2013, the petitioner approached the 2nd respondent requesting him for transfer of patta in his name. The 2nd respondent directed the petitioner to meet the Head Surveyor and to hand over the documents. Accordingly, the petitioner met the Head Surveyor and handed over the documents with a copy sent to the 1st respondent. The petitioner also forwarded a representation to the Chief Minister Special Cell, on 25.06.2014 and vide communication dated 30.06.

respondent directed the 2nd respondent to conduct an enquiry and submit a report. Despite the direction issued by the 1st respondent, the 2nd respondent has not conducted any enquiry nor any inspection of the property. Hence, on 18.05.2015, the petitioner has sent another representation to the respondents and since no response is forthcoming, he is before this Court with the present writ petition. This Court, taking into consideration the limited scope of prayer sought for by the petitioner and without going into the merits of the claim projected by the petitioner either in this writ petition or in the representation dated 18.05.2015, directs the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 18.05.2015 on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders as expeditiously as possible and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioner.

The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

18.10.2016 AP

B.RAJENDRAN, J., AP To 1.The District Collector Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.

2.The Tahsildar O/o.The Tahsildar Vandavasi Taluk Thiruvannamalai District.

WP.No.36266/2016 18.10.2016