D.Aravind v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 15.09.2025 Coram THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY D.Aravind
...Petitioner
Vs.
1. The District Collector, Chengalpattu District, Chengalpattu.
2.The Tahsildar, Chengalpattu Taluk, Chengalpattu District.
3.The Taluk Surveyor Chengalpattu Taluk, Chengalpattu District.
...Respondents
Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to dispose of application No.2025/N123/35/00735 dated 23.04.2025 for survey 1/5
the landed property of the petitioner in survey No.381/23 in Thrukachur Village, Chengalpattu Taluk and District within a limited time frame. For Petitioner :
Mr.P.Rajendran For Respondents :
Mr.D.Ravichander Special Government Pleader ***
O R D E R
Mr.D.Ravichander, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent, the main writ petition is taken up and disposed of at the stage of admission itself.
2. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking direction to the second respondent to dispose of application No.2025/N123/35/00735 dated 23.04.2025 for surveying the landed property of the petitioner in survey No.381/23 in Thrukachur Village, Chengalpattu Taluk and District within a limited time frame.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though the petitioner submitted an application dated 23.04.2025 to the 2nd respondent, seeking to survey the aforesaid property, the 2nd respondent had not 2/5
considered the same till date. Therefore, left with no other option, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for the aforesaid relief.
4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents on instructions would submit that pursuant to the petitioner's application, survey was conducted with respect to the subject land. But the petitioner was not satisfied with the survey and failed to sign in the acknowledgment receipt. He has also produced the written instructions from the 2nd respondent to that effect. Further, he would submit that if the petitioner makes a fresh application, survey will be conducted afresh.
5. Heard both sides. Perused the records.
6. In the case on hand, pursuant to petitioner's application survey was conducted and as the petitioner was not satisfied, he failed to sign in the acknowledgment receipt. As the respondents have already acted upon the petitioner's application, there is no merit in this writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed. If the petitioner is not 3/5
satisfied with the survey, he can very well submit the application for survey afresh. No costs.
15.09.2025 Speaking order / Non-Speaking order Index : Yes / No : Yes / No arr To
1. The District Collector, Chengalpattu District, Chengalpattu.
2.The Tahsildar, Chengalpattu Taluk, Chengalpattu District.
3.The Taluk Surveyor Chengalpattu Taluk, Chengalpattu District.
4/5
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
, arr 15.09.2025 5/5