Madras High CourtWP/41264/2025disposed of

P.Prema v. The District Collector

2025-11-06Honourable Mr Justice N. Anand Venkatesh4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 06.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH and W.M.P.No.46207 of 2025 P.Prema W/o.Pasupathy Petitioner Vs

1. The District Collector, Chengalpattu.

2.The District Revenue Officer, Chengalpattu.

3.The District Revenue Officer, Kanchipuram District.

4.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengalpattu.

5.The Tahsildar, Chengalpattu.

6.P.W.Yamuna Bai W/o.Ponnurangam Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for 1/4

the records in respect of impugned order in Na.Ka.No.5792/2012/N4, dated 10.11.2017 passed by the third respondent herein by confirming the order in Na.Ka.No.3102/2010/, dated 19.11.2010 passed by the fourth respondent herein and quash the same and consequently, to direct the respondents 1 to 5 to restore the petitioner's patta No.2790 in respect of S.No.263/4, Mannivakkam, Chengalpattu Taluk, Chengalpattu District. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Gopinathan For Respondents : Mr.D.Ravichander Special Government Pleader [R1 to R5] *****

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings of the third respondent dated 10.11.2017, which confirmed the order passed by the fourth respondent through proceedings dated 19.11.2010 and for a consequential direction to respondents 1 to 5 to restore the patta in the name of the petitioner with respect to the subject property.

2. Heard Mr.D.Gopinathan, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr.D.Ravichander, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 5.

2/4

3. In the considered view of this Court, this writ petition is clearly hit by laches. The petitioner is challenging the order passed in the 2017, which in turn confirmed the order passed in the year 2010. While exercising the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Court should always take note of the considerable delay with which the petitioner knocks the door of the Court. In this case, there is absolutely no explanation as to why the petitioner did not take any steps so far to challenge the order passed in the year 2017. Hence, this Court is not inclined to exercise its discretion. In any case, a suit in O.S.No.232 of 2004 is pending before the Additional District Court, Chengalpattu. Therefore, it is left open to the parties to raise all the issues in the pending suit and proceed further in accordance with law. This writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 06.11.2025 Index:yes/no Speaking order/Non-speaking order gm 3/4

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

gm To