R.Arikirshnan v. The District Collector,(Rev),

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 15.09.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY R.Arikrishnan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, (Rev), Villianur, Puducherry.

2.The Thasildar, Bahour Taluk Office, Bahour.

... 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 pass orders subsequent to the enquiry conducted on 21.01.201, with regard to patta concerning property R.S.No.57/2, 58/2, Patta No.75, 1 Kaani, and 60 Kuzhi, in Bahour Commune Madapattu Village-81. For Petitioner : Mr.V.V.Sairam For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.R.Sreedhar, Additional Government Pleader (P) 1/6

ORDER

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner to direct the second respondent to pass orders subsequent to the enquiry conducted on 21.01.201, with regard to patta concerning property R.S.No.57/2, 58/2, Patta No.75, 1 Kaani, and 60 Kuzhi, in Bahour Commune Madapattu Village-81.

2. Mr.R.Sreedhar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of respondents 1 & 2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has purchased the property comprised in R.S.No.57/2, 58/2, Patta No.75, 1 Kaani, and 60 Kuzhi in Bahour Communue, Madapattu Village-81 from one Ramadas, Power of Attorney of one Kodhandapani. In order to transfer patta on his name, he made an online application with necessary fee. However, the same was not considered. Hence, he made a representation dated 19.02.2007 before the first respondent and thereafter, an enquiry was conducted on 21.01.2019. Since then, no 2/6

order was passed and patta was also not issued in favour of the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.

4. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 & 2 would submit that the petitioner has referred a representations said to have been sent on 15.07.2021 and 21.10.2019 and no acknowledgement has been furnished sofar. Without any information, the respondents are not in a position to find out anything. In the event any fresh representation is made by the petitioner, appropriate action would be taken and the said submission has been acceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. I can find force in the submission of the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 & 2. Without knowing what is the grievance of the petitioner; no documentary 3/6

evidence; and no proof for conducting enquiry, the respondent will not be in a position to conduct any further enquiry and pass appropriate orders. Therefore, I do not find any merits in this case and inclined to dismiss this writ petition. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file a fresh fresh representation, in which case, the respondents are directed to consider the same on merits and in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders.

Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 15.09.2025 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No vm 4/6

To 1.The District Collector, (Rev), Villianur, Puducherry.

2.The Thasildar, Bahour Taluk Office, Bahour.

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J., vm 5/6

15.09.2025 6/6