Pitchai v. Rakku

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date : 04/03/2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU AND THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY and CMP(MD) No.3608 of 2025 Pitchai ... Appellant v.

1.Rakku 2.The District Collector O/o.the District Collector Sivagangai District.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai Taluk Sivagangai District 4.The Sub-Registrar Sivagangai Taluk Sivagangai District 5.The Tahsildar Sivagangai Taluk Sivagangai District ... Respondents 1/5

PRAYER :- Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters patent against the order of this Court dated 07.02.2025 in WP(MD). No.3217 of 2025. For Appellants : Mr.K.Sankar For Respondent : Mr.M.Sarangan for R2 to R6 Additional Government Pleader

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by J.NISHA BANU,J.) The writ appeal is directed against the order of the writ Court dated 07.02.2025 in WP(MD) No.3217 of 2025.

2. The 6th respondent in the writ petition is the appellant herein.

3. The writ petitioner/first respondent herein had filed the writ petition challenging the impugned order of the Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, in and by which, the patta standing in the name of the writ petitioner was cancelled and a fresh patta was issued in favour of the 6th respondent. The learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition by remitting the matter back to the 4th respondent/Tahsildar therein for fresh disposal for fresh hearing and disposal on the simple ground that principles of natural justice has been violated in not hearing the writ petitioner before 2/5

cancelling the name of the petitioner in the patta. Challenging the said order, the appellant is before this Court.

4. It is the stand of the learned counsel for the appellant that the writ petition has been decided at the admission stage itself and without hearing the appellant herein. The learned counsel would further submit that the 1st respondent has suppressed the material facts in the writ petition and that the Tahsildar has rightly issued patta in favour of the appellant herein and hence, prays for interference of the order of the writ Court.

5. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record.

6. From the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant, it is seen that the writ Court while allowing the writ petition filed by the 1st respondent has remitted the matter back to the Tahsildar for fresh hearing and disposal and the Tahsildar was also directed to hear not only the writ petitioner but also the appellant herein and pass orders after giving 3/5

opportunity to both the writ petitioner and the appellant herein. Therefore, the ground that has been raised is not a valid one that the appellant. Hence, no interference is warranted to the order of the writ Court. Accordingly, the writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. [J.N.B.,J] [S.S.Y.,J] 04.03.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No RR To 2.The District Collector O/o.the District Collector Sivagangai District.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai Taluk Sivagangai District 4.The Sub-Registrar Sivagangai Taluk Sivagangai District 5.The Tahsildar Sivagangai Taluk Sivagangai District 4/5

J.NISHA BANU, J AND S.SRIMATHY, J.

RR

ORDER

IN WA(MD) No.455 of 2025 Date : 04/03/2025 5/5