P.Srinivasan v. District Collector,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10-11-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
1. P.Srinivasan S/o.Pichaimani, No.167, Big Street, Thenkadappanthangal Village, Walajah Taluk, Ranipet District.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. District Collector, Office Of Ranipet, Ranipet District.
2.District Revenue Officer, Collector Office, Ranipet District 3.Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranipet, Ranipet District.
4.Tahsildar, Tahsildhar Office Walajah Taluk, Ranipet District.
Respondent(s) PRAYER Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance
of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 3rd respondent herein vide na.ka.A4/1025/2025, dated 04.07.2025, and quash the same consequently direct the 4th respondent herein to issue the patta in favour of the petitioner herein vide S.No.213 Thenkadappanthangal Village, Walajah Taluk, Ranipet District and pass orders.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.R.Ramesh For Respondent:
Mr.D.Ravichander Special Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the rd respondent dated 04.07.2025 and for a consequential direction to the 4 th respondent to issue patta in favour of the petitioner with respect to the subject property.
2.
Heard Mr.R.Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Ravichandran, learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents.
3.
The case of the petitioner is that the subject property belonged to his great grand father. Thereafter, the grand father of the petitioner and the other villagers constructed a temple in a portion of the land and it was maintained by all of them. However, the revenue records were continued in the individual
names and not in the name of the temple.
4.
During the UDR proceedings, the patta was assigned in favour of some of the third parties, who had nothing to do with the subject property. Accordingly, after coming to know of the same, the petitioner submitted an appeal before the 3 rd respondent seeking for cancellation of patta that was granted in favour of third parties and to restore the patta to its original state. 5.
The 3 rd respondent in the impugned proceedings has stated that the patta was transferred during the UDR scheme based on the proceedings of the DRO and hence, the petitioner has to necessarily submit the representation before the DRO and seek for the appropriate remedy. 6.
In the considered view of this Court, this Court does not find any illegality in the order passed by the 3 rd respondent. The petitioner ought to have approached the 2 nd respondent and sought for the correction of the revenue records and instead, the petitioner had approached the 3 rd respondent. Only the nd respondent is vested with the power to revise the order passed during the UDR scheme.
7.
In view of the above, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the 2 nd respondent by filing a revision along with all the relevant documents and on receipt of the same, the 2 nd respondent shall act upon the representation /
revision, after affording opportunity to the petitioner and other interested parties and pass final orders within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the representation / revision from the petitioner. 8.
This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs.
10-11-2025 rka Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes
To 1.District Collector, Office Of Ranipet, Ranipet District.
2.District Revenue Officer, Collector Office, Ranipet District 3.Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranipet, Ranipet District.
4.Tahsildar, Tahsildhar Office Walajah Taluk, Ranipet District.
N.ANAND VENKATESH J.
rka 10-11-2025