← Library
Madras High CourtWP/41782/2025disposed of

Sathish Dhnapal v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

2025-11-10Honourable Mr Justice N. Anand Venkatesh5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-11-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

1. Sathish Dhanapal Old No.41-B, New No.10, Manduganeeswarar Koil Street, Kancheepuram -631502 Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer Kancheepuram Division, Kancheepuram Collectorate Campus, Kancheepuram-631 501 2.The Thasildhar Kancheepuram Taluk, Kancheepuram -631502 3.R.Ganesan No.1, Titti Vasal Street, Sriperumbandur-602 051 Respondent(s) PRAYER Writ petition filed under Article 226 calling for the records of the 2nd

respondent on his file No.2025/0153/03/001258 dt.18.9.2025 and quash the same and further directing the respondents to transfer the patta to the name of the petitioner and pass orders.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.V.Manoharan For Respondent:

Mr.C.Jayaprakash Government Advocate

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the on-line rejection order passed by the 2 nd respondent dated 18.09.2025 and for a consequential direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to transfer the patta in the name of the petitioner with respect to the subject property. 2.

Heard Mr.V.Manoharan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.C.Jayaprakash, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2. 3.

The case of the petitioner is that he is the absolute owner of the subject property by virtue of a registered sale deed dated 01.07.2025 registered as document No.4212 of 2025. The petitioner submitted an application seeking for issuance of patta. The 2 nd respondent through the on-line rejection order dated 18.09.2025, rejected the application given by the petitioner on the ground that a Court case is pending.

4.

The grievance of the petitioner is that to the best of his knowledge no Court case is pending and that out of the sale consideration paid by the

petitioner, a portion of it was paid for discharging the mortgage. Therefore, according to the petitioner, if an opportunity had been given to the petitioner, the petitioner would have clarified the position to the 2 nd respondent. But, however, no opportunity was granted.

5.

In the considered view of this Court, the on-line rejection order has been passed without affording opportunity to the petitioner and it is in violation of principles of natural justice.

6.

In view of the above, the impugned on-line rejection order passed by the 2 nd respondent dated 18.09.2025 is hereby set-aside. The matter is remitted back to the file of the 2 nd respondent to consider the application submitted by the petitioner by affording opportunity to the petitioner and thereafter, pass orders on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7.

In the result, this writ petition is allowed with the above directions. No costs.

10-11-2025 rka Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer Kancheepuram Division, Kancheepuram Collectorate Campus, Kancheepuram-631 501 2.The Thasildhar Kancheepuram Taluk, Kancheepuram -631502 3.R.Ganesan No.1, Titti Vasal Street, Sriperumbandur-602 051

N.ANAND VENKATESH J.

rka 10-11-2025