V.Dhanalakshmi v. The District Revenue Officer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:13.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI and W.M.P(MD)No.2712 of 2025 V.Dhanalakshmi ... Petitioner vs.
1.The District Revenue Officer, Madurai District, Madurai.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thirumangalam Revenue Division, Thirumangalam, Madurai District.
3.The Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram Taluk, Thirupparankundram, Madurai District.
4.Munaivar Sulthana 5.S.M.B.Ramalingam ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to make fresh 1/6
consideration of the revision petition filed by this petitioner, dated 17.03.2017 in the light of the order of this Court in W.P(MD)No.3362 of 2022, dated 22.02.2022 and to issue patta in the name of this petitioner, after holding the enquiry as duly contemplated under the provisions of law, by rectifying the corrections in the UDR, for the Plot Nos.3 and 4 in S.No.199/4, within a time frame fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.F.X.Eugene For Respondents : Mr.B.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R3
ORDER
The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition seeking the relief of issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.08.2022 seeking compliance of the order of this Court in W.P(MD)No.3362 of 2022, dated 22.02.2022.
2.Considering the limited scope of the relief sought for in the writ petition, with the consent of the learned counsel on either side, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.
2/6
3.The petitioner had applied for name transfer of patta and sub-division of his property. Since there was no representation, the petitioner sent a representation to the second respondent on 21.01.2017 to direct the third respondent/Tahsildar to issue patta for her plots bearing Nos.3 and 4. The said representation of the petitioner was not complied with and hence, the petitioner preferred a revision before the first respondent on 17.03.2017. The said revision petition was closed on account of non-appearance of the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, moved this Court in W.P(MD)No.3362 of 2022 challenging the proceedings of the first respondent. This Court, by order dated 22.02.
2022, set aside the order of the first respondent and remitted the matter to the first respondent for fresh consideration and to decide the writ petitioner's revision within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite the said order passed by this Court, the first respondent has not disposed of the pending revision. Hence, she has chosen to prefer the present writ petition.
4.I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents 1 to 3. 3/6
5.I find that though the order of this Court has not been complied with, the petitioner also appears to have slept over the matter and has now preferred the writ petition seeking disposal of the revision, in line with the directions passed by this Court in W.P(MD)No.3362 of 2022.
6.In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the first respondent to dispose of the petitioner's revision petition in line with the order of this Court in W.P(MD)No.3362 of 2022, dated 22.02.2022, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7.With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 13.02.2025 sji NCC: Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No To 1.The District Revenue Officer, Madurai District, Madurai.
4/6
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thirumangalam Revenue Division, Thirumangalam, Madurai District.
3.The Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram Taluk, Thirupparankundram, Madurai District.
5/6
P.B.BALAJI , J.
sji 13.02.2025 6/6