Ponnam Perumal v. The Appellate Authority / Revenue Divisional Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13.06.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR and W.M.P(MD) Nos.11979 and 12053 of 2025 Ponnam Perumal ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Appellate Authority/Revenue Divisional Officer, Cheranmahadevi RDO Office, 2.The Tahsildar, Radhapuram Taluk Office, 3.Joel Thambiraj 4.Ratchanyapushpafelomina@ Felomina ... Respondents Prayer :- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer,

Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District, the first respondent herein made in PA.MU.C.PA.A.132(1533)2024/AA3 dated 01.07.2024 quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the first respondent to restore the Patta No.4421 stood in the name of Ponnam Perumal/petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Abiya For R1 & R2 : Mrs.S.Jeya Priya Government Advocate

ORDER

This writ petition is filed challenging the order made in PA.MU.C.PA.A.132(1533)2024/AA3, dated 01.07.2024, passed by the first respondent cancelling the patta that stood in the name of the petitioner.

2.Heard the arguments of Mr.K.Abiya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs.S.Jeya Priya, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2. Since no adverse order is passed against the respondents 3 and 4, notice to the respondents 3 and 4 is dispensed with.

3.By consent of both sides, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

4.According to the petitioner, he purchased the subject property under a sale deed dated 14.06.2021. Thereafter, as per the order passed by the Tashildar, Radhapuram, the revenue records were mutated in his name. Subsequently, the third respondent herein filed an application before the first respondent seeking cancellation of the patta issued in the name of the petitioner by contending that the petitioner had obtained the patta in his name by producing bogus documents. In the impugned order, it is observed by the first respondent that during enquiry, the petitioner has not produced any documents to substantiate his right over the subject property and canceled the patta issued in the name of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has come before this Court.

5.Against the order passed by the first respondent cancelling the patta issued in favour of the petitioner, he has got a remedy of revision before the District Revenue Officer. Instead of availing the alternative

remedy, the petitioner has approached this Court straight away. It is seen from the impugned order that the petitioner participated in the enquiry before the first respondent and a copy of the impugned order was also marked to the petitioner. In these circumstances, there is no violation of the principles of natural justice. Hence, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition and the same is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file a revision before the District Revenue Officer within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

13.06.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No cp To 1.The Appellate Authority/Revenue Divisional Officer, Cheranmahadevi RDO Office, 2.The Tahsildar, Radhapuram Taluk Office,

S.SOUNTHAR ,J cp W.P.(MD)No.15815 of 2025 Dated: 13.06.2025