P.T.Mathew v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 13.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN and WMP.No.42642of 2025 P.T.Mathew ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector Office Of District Collector, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore 641 018.

2.The District Revenue Officer Office Of The District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore 641 018.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer Office Of The Revenue Divisional Officer, Coimbatore South, Coimbatore.

4.Thomas Chandy 5.Rukumani

...Respondents

Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the order dated 26.08.2025 in Na. Mu.E1014431/ 2023/ E1 on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal null and void. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Karthik 1/5

For Respondents : Mr.D.Ravichander, Govt. Advocate for R.1 to R.3.

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 26.08.2025 thereby the sub-division was cancelled and the subject land was restored to its original position.

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

3. The petitioner was the original owner of 60 cents of land comprised in Survey No.132/2B, situated at Sundakkamuthur Village, Perur Taluk, Coimbatore District. The said land forms part of a larger extent of 1.54 acres comprised in Survey No.132/2, originally belonging to one C.L. Francis. Out of the said extent, 30 cents of land was conveyed to one Gunajothi and K. Meiyappan. They executed a Power of Attorney in favour of one Meenakshi Sundaram, who, in turn, conveyed 60 cents of land in favour of the petitioner, vide Document Nos.1474 and 1475 of 2007. Thereafter, the petitioner subdivided the said property and sold the plots to various persons.

4.While being so, based on the complaint lodged by respondents 4 2/5

and 5, the 2nd respondent conducted a detailed enquiry. During the enquiry, it was found that the sale deed executed in favour of the petitioner was disputed, both with respect to its extent and boundaries. It was also found that a suit for declaration in respect of the subject property is already pending and that there exists a cloud over the title. Therefore, the 2nd respondent rightly cancelled the sub-division and restored the property to its original position.

5. The petitioner ought to approach the Civil Court for appropriate remedy and if the petitioner succeeds before the Civil Court, he is at liberty to approach the Revenue Authorities to mutate the revenue records.

6. In view of the above, I find no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 26.08.2025. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

13.10.2025 Index : Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No (shr) To 3/5

1.The District Collector Office Of District Collector, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore 641 018.

2.The District Revenue Officer Office Of The District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore 641 018.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer Office Of The Revenue Divisional Officer, Coimbatore South, Coimbatore.

G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN . J., 4/5

(shr) and WMP.No.42642 of 2025 13.10.2025 5/5