Gunasekaran v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI W.P(MD)No.4679 of 2020 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.4053 & 4054 of 2020 Gunasekaran ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Madurai District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai 625 020.

3.The Tahsildar, Madurai North, Madurai.

... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.826/2020/B dated 7.2.2020 quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to restore the 2C patta in favour of petitioner granted by 3rd respondent in Na.Ka.No. 1925/2016/A3 dated 21.4.2016 in Survey No.6/13, Thiruppalai Village, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District for the usufructs right for fruit bearing trees 1/4

For Petitioner :Mr.H.Lakshmi Shankar for Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan For Respondents :Mr.Veerakathiravan Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.A.Kannan Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents.

2. The petitioner was given 2-C patta in the year 2016. Vide proceedings dated 07.02.2020, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai cancelled the same. Challenging the cancellation order, this writ petition came to be filed.

3. The prime argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the RDO, Madurai has misconstrued the order passed by this Court as if direction has been given for cancelling 2-C patta given for all over Tamil Nadu. We do concur with the said contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. But that would not advance the case further. The initial grant of 2-C patta itself appears to be an act of favouritism. The petitioner cannot demand that the patta which is only a license to enjoy the usufructs should be kept alive in perpetuity. It is always open to the authority to cancel the same. Admittedly, the petitioner has no right as such. We do not find any ground to interfere. 2/4

4. The writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. [G.R.S., J.] [B.P., J.] 10.07.2025 NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No rmi To 1.The District Collector, Madurai District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai 625 020.

3.The Tahsildar, Madurai North, Madurai.

3/4

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J and B.PUGALENDHI, J.

rmi W.P(MD)No.4679 of 2020 10.07.2025 4/4