Ilayaraja v. The District Revenue Officer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.01.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA Ilayaraja ...
Petitioner -vs1 The District Revenue Officer, Trichy District, Trichy.
2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srirangam Division, Trichy District.
3 The Tahsildar, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District.
...
Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to incorporate petitioner's name and also the names of other legal heirs of his father in respect of the lands measuring to an extent of 5.96 acres and 4 cents comprised in Survey nos. 137/1 and 137/2 respectively situated at Vellaikkonpatti Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District, in the revenue
records, including A register and issue patta in favour of petitioner, by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 30.11.2024. For Petitioner :
Mr.T.Lenin Kumar For Respondents : Mr.A.Kannan, Addl. Govt. Pleader.
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition for a mandamus, directing the respondents to incorporate the petitioner's name and also the names of other legal heirs of his father in respect of the lands measuring to an extent of 5.96 acres and 4 cents, comprised in Survey nos.137/1 and 137/2 respectively, situated at Vellaikkonpatti Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District, in the revenue records, including A register and issue patta in favour of petitioner, by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 30.11.2024.
2. The petitioner approached the third respondent in person for issuance of patta, but the third respondent informed the petitioner that the subject property in Survey No.137/1 was classified as Devathayam in ARegister and the property in Survey No.137/2 stood in the name of one Rama Pandaram. When the petitioner questioned the third respondent on the erroneous classification, the third respondent informed the petitioner that
during UDR survey, the land was classified as Devathayam. Aggrieved by the erroneous classification, the petitioner sent a representation, dated 30.11.2024, to the respondents, requesting them to rectify the erroneous classification and incorporate the petitioner's name in the revenue records. As the first respondent was the competent authority to rectify the classification in A-Register, the petitioner sent a representation to the first respondent on 30.11.2024, by registered post. As the first respondent had not taken any steps in pursuance of the petitioner's representation, the petitioner filed the above writ petition for the aforesaid relief.
3. With the consent of the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.
5. Learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents, on instructions, submits that reasonable time may be granted to the first respondent to conduct enquiry and pass final orders on the petitioner's representation, dated 30.11.2024.
6. In the light of the above facts, the first respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 30.11.2024, give notice of enquiry to all concerned, conduct enquiry, and and pass orders on merits and
in accordance with law, within the time-line mentioned in the Circular, dated 17.07.2023, of the Commissioner of Land Administration, Chennai.
7. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. 28.01.2025 NCC :
Yes / No Index :
Yes / No Internet :
Yes / No dixit To:
1 The District Revenue Officer, Trichy District, Trichy.
2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srirangam Division, Trichy District.
3 The Tahsildar, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy District.
N.MALA, J.
dixit 28.01.2025