A.R.Natraj v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06-01-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
1. A.R.Natraj
2. K.Loganathan
3. A.K.Krishnamoorthy ..Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The District Collector, Theeran Chinnamalai Maligai 1st Floor, Opposite Court Perundurai Road, ERode district
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, District Collectors Office ERode district
3. Tahsildar, Metu Naasuvampallayam, Elavamalai Village Erode district
4. The Village Administrative officer, Metu Naasuvampallayam, Elavamalai Village Erode district
5. A.S.Subramaniam ..Respondent(s) call for the records pertaining to the proceedings in Na.Ka.No. 4247/ 2025/ A4 pending on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and consequently forbear the 2nd respondent from interfering in any serious title dispute in respect of the petitioners property in SF No. 281/15.
For Petitioner(s):
MR.M.GURUPRASAD For Respondent(s):
MR.C.JAYAPRAKASH, GOVT ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4 __________Page 1 of 4
ORDER
Mr.C.Jayaprakash, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4. Since no adverse orders are passed against the fifth respondent, notice to the fifth respondent in this writ petition is dispensed with.
2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings dated 05.08.2025 issued by the second respondent. However, as seen from the impugned proceedings, it is merely a summons issued to the petitioner and others pertaining to the request made by the fifth respondent for cancellation of patta standing in the name of the petitioners.
3. It is an admitted fact that the petitioners have also sent a reply to the impugned proceedings by stating their objections with regard to the request made by the fifth respondent for cancellation of patta. The question of entertaining this writ petition, at this stage, does not arise, as the proceedings challenged in this writ petition is merely a summons issued by the second respondent for the appearance of the petitioners for conducting an enquiry on the application filed by the fifth respondent for cancellation of patta issued to the petitioners.
__________Page 2 of 4
4. Necessarily, the petitioners will have to participate in the enquiry called for by the second respondent under the impugned proceedings. However, the second respondent will have to consider the objections raised by the petitioners through their reply and also consider their supporting documents, viz., (a) partition deed dated 22.02.1981; and (b) compromise decree in O.S.No.2 of 2021, dated 20.03.2021, before passing final orders on the application filed by the fifth respondent seeking for cancellation of patta issued to the petitioners.
5. For the foregoing reasons, since the writ petition has been filed prematurely, this Court is not entertaining the same. However, it is made clear that the second respondent will have to consider the objections raised by the petitioner and consider all the supporting documents filed by them, and only after conducting a proper enquiry, the second respondent is empowered to pass final orders on the fifth respondent's request for cancellation of patta issued to the petitioners. With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No Costs. W.M.P.No.56545 of 2025 is ordered, subject to payment of separate court fee. W.M.P.Nos.56547 and 56548 of 2025 are closed. 06-01-2026 RKM __________Page 3 of 4
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
RKM To
1. The District Collector, Theeran Chinnamalai Maligai 1st Floor, Opposite Court Perundurai Road, ERode district
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, District Collectors Office ERode district
3. Tahsildar, Metu Naasuvampallayam, Elavamalai Village Erode district
4. The Village Administrative officer, Metu Naasuvampallayam, Elavamalai Village Erode district.
06-01-2026 __________Page 4 of 4