← Library
Madras High CourtWP/26585/2024disposed of

K.M.Thangavel v. The Commissioner Of Land Administration

2024-09-30Honourable Mr Justice S. Sounthar5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 30.09.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR W.P No.26585 of 2024 K.M.Thangavel

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Commissioner of Land Administration Ezhilagam, Chepauk Chennai.

2.The District Revenue Officer Coimbatore.

3.The Sub Collector, Pollachi.

4.The Tahsildar, Pollachi.

...Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent herein to give necessary information to the second respondent in respect of revision petition No.13720 of 2018 pending on his file, by considering petitioner's representation dated 27.06.2023 and consequently enabling the second 1/5

respondent to dispose off Revision Petition No.13720 of 2018 within a strict time frame fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.S.Vijaya Raghavan For Respondents : Mr.D.Gopal for R1 to R4 Government Advocate

O R D E R

The petitioner herein seeks a direction to the first respondent to give necessary information to the second respondent enabling him to dispose of the Revision Petition No.13720 of 2018 pending on the file of the second respondent, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 27.06.2023.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he filed an application before the fourth respondent seeking transfer of patta in his name in respect of the properties situated in S.No.309/4 at Nallampalli Village, Pollachi Taluk, Coimbatore District. The said application was dismissed by the fourth respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal on the file the of the third respondent and the same was disposed of without hearing the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred the Revision before the second respondent in Revsion Petition No.13720 of 2018 and the 2/5

same is still pending without any progress. Ultimately, the petitioner came to know that the second respondent sought for certain information from the first respondent and the same has not been furnished and therefore, the second respondent is unable to dispose of the revision filed by the petitioner. In such circumstances, the petitioner filed the above Writ Petition seeking direction to the first respondent to furnish information sought for by the second respondent and a direction to the second respondent to dispose of the revision.

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate who takes notice for the respondents would submit that the second respondent has received necessary information from the first respondent and therefore the revision filed by the petitioner will be disposed of within a period of three weeks.

4. In view of the statement made by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents, this Court is inclined to issue a direction to the second respondent to dispose of the revision filed by the petitioner in Revision No.13720 of 2018 within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

3/5

5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

30.09.2024 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order dna To 1.The Commissioner of Land Administration Ezhilagam, Chepauk Chennai.

2.The District Revenue Officer Coimbatore.

3.The Sub Collector, Pollachi.

4.The Tahsildar, Pollachi.

4/5

S.SOUNTHAR , J.

dna W.P No.26585 of 2024 30.09.2024 5/5