N. Maharajan v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI W.P.(MD) No.2990 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.2083 and 2085 of 2025 M.Maharajan ... Petitioner /Vs./ 1.The District Collector, Theni District.
2.The Sub Collector, Sub Collector Office, Theni District.
3.The District Revenue Officer, District Revenue Office, Theni District.
4.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Periyakulam, Theni District.
5.The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Aundipatty Taluk, Theni District.
1/6
6.K.Muneeswaran 7.K.Mareeswaran ... Respondents P RAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.2389/2020/A1 dated 09.03.2021 and the subsequent impugned proceedings of the 4th respondent Pa.Mu.No.5253/2023/A2 dated 06.11.2023 and to quash the same as illegal and further to direct the respondents 2 to 5 to conduct an appropriate enquiry after serving notice and all revenue documents and by giving opportunity to the petitioner with related to the dispute land consist of 16 cents (6976 square feet) and 7 cents (3060 Square feet) in survey Number 2347/5 at Thimrasanayakanur Village Bit, Aundipatty Sub Division, Periyakulam, Theni District within the time frame fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Gokul For R1 to R5 : Mr.B.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader For R6 & R7 : Mr.B.Saravanan Senior Counsel for Mr.A.Arivu Chandran 2/6
ORDER
Heard Mr.K.Gokul, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.B.Saravanan, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents 1 to 5 and Mr.B.Saravanan, Senior Counsel for Mr.A.Arivu Chandran, learned counsel for the respondents 6 and 7. 2.The writ petitioner challenges the order of the second respondent, dated 09.03.2021 and the proceedings of the fourth respondent dated 06.11.2023.
3.The specific grounds of challenge in the writ petition are that the petitioner was not put on any notice and no summons were issued to the petitioner for any enquiry. Earlier, when I heard the writ petition, I found that there was no illegality or perversity in the findings arrived at by the authorities for this Court to exercise discretion and interfere with the said orders. The only ground, on which, the writ petition was adjourned was to ascertain whether the writ petitioner was put on prior notice about the enquiry proceedings before the impugned order came to be passed. 3/6
4.Today, the learned Additional Government Pleader has produced the original records. I have perused the same. 5.It is seen from the records that enquiry notice has been duly sent to the writ petitioner and a copy of the same is also available. In fact, the writ petitioner himself has replied to the said notice on 11.07.2023, acknowledging receipt of the enquiry notice. The petitioner, in fact, has further stated that he has already given a detailed objections on 27.07.2023 and the same may also be considered. 6.Therefore, I do not see any violation of principles of natural justice, warranting interference with the well considered orders of the authorities. It shall be open to the petitioner to take recourse to further proceedings as may be available under law.
7.In fine, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. Index : Yes / No 24.04.2025 NCC : Yes / No 4/6
TO:- 1.The District Collector, Theni District.
2.The Sub Collector, Sub Collector Office, Theni District.
3.The District Revenue Officer, District Revenue Office, Theni District.
4.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Periyakulam, Theni District.
5.The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Aundipatty Taluk, Theni District.
5/6
P.B. BALAJI , J.
mm Order made in Dated:
24.04.2025 6/6