Anusuya Deicy Ernest v. The District Revenue Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27-01-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE Anusuya Deicy Ernest, D/o. Late.Mr.Ramalingam, No. H88G, 4, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, 1st Sea Ward Road, Valmigi Nagar, Chennai 41. Petitioner(s) Vs 1.The District Revenue Officer, Cuddalore, Cuddalore District.

2.The Sub Collector, Chidambaram.

3.The Tahsildar, Kattumannarkoil Taluk, Kattumannarkoil.

4.Ganesh Kumar, S/o. Gnana Desikan, No. 17 New City Nagar, Elanangoor Village, Nanjalur Post, Chidambaram Taluk, Cuddalore District.

5.Punithavathi, W/o. Jeevajothi, Pulavar Arumuganar Nagar, Near Palvadi, Thiruvakulam, Annamalai Nagar, Chidambaram Taluk, Cuddalore District.

6.Arumugam, S/o. Gurunathan, Omampuliur Road, Movur South Village, Kattumannarkoil Taluk, Cuddalore District.

Respondent(s)

PRAYER:-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to consider the representation dated 13.02.2023 to cancel the patta issued in favour of 4th and 5th Respondents for the land in Survey Nos. 93/ 6B2B, 7B1A, 7B2B, 7B1C, 7B2C, 6B1, 93/7B1B and 93/7B2B of Mannarkudi Village, Patta bearing No.223 stands in the name of the 6th respondent for the land in Survey No.264/1B of Movur Village (South) and patta bearing No. 100 stands in the name of Mr.Gnanathesigan for the land in Survey Nos. 114/4 and 114/6 of Movur Village (North).

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.S.Bruno Cruz For Respondent(s):

Mr.C.Jayaprakash Govt Advocate For R1 to R3.

M/s.P.Srividhya, For R4 & R5 Mr.G.Pugazhenthi For R6

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking to direct the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 13.02.2023, seeking for cancellation of Patta No.223 standing in the name of the 6th respondent and Patta No.100 standing in the name of Gnanathesigan for the respective properties more fully described in the prayer to this writ petition. The respondents 4 and 5 are the legal heirs of Mr.Gnanathesigan.

2.The petitioner had filed the supporting documents before the 2nd respondent in support of her representation seeking for cancellation of aforesaid pattas. The petitioner relies upon the Civil Court judgment passed in her favour for cancellation of aforesaid pattas.

3.The counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents 4 and 5 before this Court today. They have categorically contended that the petitioner has no legal rights over the properties which are the subject matter of Patta Nos.223 and 100.

4.Learned counsel appearing for the 6th respondent also submits that the Civil Court judgment relied upon by the petitioner does not have any relevance with regards to the properties for which the petitioner seeks for cancellation of pattas issued in favour of the respective parties as referred to supra. 5.However, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the Official respondents would submit that pursuant to the representation of the petitioner seeking for cancellation of pattas, summons have been issued to all the parties including the private respondents 4 to 6.

6.In view of the same, since the 2nd respondent had already issued notice of hearing to the respective parties on the petitioner's representation, necessarily all the parties will have to go before the 2nd respondent and raise all their objections that they are raising before this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to enable the 2nd respondent to decide the petitioner's representation seeking for cancellation of pattas on merits and in accordance with law, within the time frame to be fixed by this Court, after hearing the objections of the private respondents 4 to 6 and any other third party, whom the 2nd respondent deems it fit to enquire.

Instead of raising the objections before the 2nd respondent, the respondents 4 to 6 are raising their objections before this Court in a writ petition filed by the petitioner, who has sought for disposal of the petitioner's representation since the said representation was not considered prior to the filing of this writ petition. 7.This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the contentions made by the respective parties before this Court. It is for the 2nd respondent to decide the issue, on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing all the objections raised by the respective parties. 8.For the foregoing reasons, this Court directs the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 13.02.

cancellation of pattas issued in favour of the respondents 4 and 5 for the land in Survey Nos. 93/ 6B2B, 7B1A, 7B2B, 7B1C, 7B2C, 6B1, 93/7B1B and 93/7B2B of Mannarkudi Village, Patta bearing No.223 standing in the name of the 6th respondent for the land in Survey No.264/1B of Movur Village (South) and patta bearing No. 100 standing in the name of Mr.Gnanathesigan for the land in Survey Nos. 114/4 and 114/6 of Movur Village (North), after hearing the objections of the respondents 4 to 6, as well as any other third party, whom the 2nd respondent deems it fit to enquire, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that all the parties shall co-operate with the 2nd respondent, to enable the 2nd respondent to pass final orders as directed by this Court.

9.With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 27-01-2026 rst Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To 1.The District Revenue Officer, Cuddalore, Cuddalore District.

2.The Sub Collector, Chidambaram.

3.The Tahsildar, Kattumannarkoil Taluk, Kattumannarkoil.

ABDUL QUDDHOSE J.

rst 27-01-2026