R. Manickam v. The Revenue Divisional Officer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI R.Manickam .... Petitioner /Vs./ 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srirangam Division, Trichy District.
2.The Tahsildar, Srirangam Taluk, Trichy District.
3.The Deputy Tahsildar, Manikandam, Trichy District.
4.Mookan ... Respondents P RAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to remove the name of the fourth respondent from the Patta No.176 and mutate the patta into petitioner name pertaining to the property comprised in Survey No. 23/3A situated at Kozhukattaikudi Village, Srirangam Taluk, Trichy District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 05.03.2024. 1/5
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Leninkumar For R1 to R3 : Mr.B.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The petitioner has filed the writ petition seeking limited relief of issuance of writ of mandamus to direct the second respondent Tahsildar, Srirangam Taluk to remove the name of the fourth respondent in Patta No.176 and consequently, mutate the patta in the name of the petitioner in respect of survey No.23/3A, Kozhukattaikudi Village, Srirangam Taluk, Trichy District.
2. Considering the limited scope of the relief sought for, with the consent of parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal, at the admission stage itself.
3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court. 2/5
4. The grievance of the petitioner is that by mistake the name of the 4th respondent was included in the patta, which came to the petitioner's knowledge, after demise of his father. The petitioner has made a representation to the second respondent on 05.03.2024. According to the petitioner, the second respondent directed the third respondent to enquire into the matter and submit a report. However, according to the petitioner, the third respondent has not acted upon the same and the matter is pending for more than a year.
5. Considering the above, the learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that the report has only been called for by the first respondent from the respondents 2 & 3 and therefore, the first respondent would be the component authority to pass orders and not the second respondent.
6. Even though, the prayer has been made in the writ petition seeking direction to the second respondent, in the light of the contentions advanced by the learned Additional Government Pleader, the writ petition is allowed directing the first respondent to pass final orders 3/5
on the petitioner's application dated 05.03.2024, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Index : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No 06.02.2025 am TO:- 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srirangam Division, Trichy District.
2.The Tahsildar, Srirangam Taluk, Trichy District.
3.The Deputy Tahsildar, Manikandam, Trichy District.
4/5
P.B. BALAJI , J.
am Order made in Dated:
06.02.2025 5/5