Saravanan v. The Tahsildar

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.02.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI W.P.(MD).No.4412 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD).No.3165 of 2025 Saravanan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Tahsildar, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

2. The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

3. The Revenue Inspector, Veeravanur Circle, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

4. The Surveyor, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

5. The Village Administrative Officer, Muthalur, Veeravanur Circle, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

1/6

6. Govindan

7. Ajithkumar 8.Vijay

9. Kathir 10.Narmatha 11.Soundarya ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in Koppu No.2024/0105/27/2773690 dated 14.09.2024 its consequence proceedings in Koppu No.2024/0105/27/288581 dated 11.01.2025 and quash the same, consequently directing the 1st respondent to sub divide and issue separate patta in the petitioner's name, its compromising in Survey No.206/2C, its joint Patta No.901 by demarcating the said Survey Number.

For Petitioner : Mr.Kannan Gurusami For R1 to R5 : Mr.C.Satheesh Government Advocate 2/6

ORDER

Mr.C.Satheesh, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 5.

2. The petitioner challenges the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent dated 14.09.2024 and consequence proceedings dated 11.01.2025.

3. Considering the manner of rejection order passed by the 1st respondent, with the consent of the parties, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

4. The petitioner has sought for subdivision and issuance of separate patta in his name. In that regard, he has made an application. However, in and by the impugned order dated 14.09.2024, the application has been rejected. Strangely the reason for rejection cited by the respondent is "OK" and the consequential order reason for rejection is mentioned as "REJECT". The impugned orders are therefore, clearly non-speaking and unsustainable in the eye of law.

3/6

5. For this limited reason, the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remitted back to the 1st respondent to afford an opportunity by way of a personal hearing to the writ petitioner to produce all relevant documents in support of his contentions and thereafter, dispose of the petitioner's representation for subdivision and issuance of separate patta in the name of the petitioner in accordance with law and in merits. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. The writ petition stands allowed with the above observations and directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

19.02.2025 NCC :yes/No Index :yes/No Internet:yes/No rgm 4/6

To

1. The Tahsildar, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

2. The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

3. The Revenue Inspector, Veeravanur Circle, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

4. The Surveyor, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

5. The Village Administrative Officer, Muthalur, Veeravanur Circle, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

5/6

P.B.BALAJI , J.

rgm W.P.(MD).No.4412 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD).No.3165 of 2025 19.02.2025 6/6