Subramani v. The District Collector,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.03.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN Subramani ... Appellant/Petitioner vs.

1.The District Collector, O/o.District Collectorate Office, Thanthonimalai, Karur District.

2.The District Most Backward Class Welfare Officer, O/o.District Collector Office, Thanthonimalai, Karur District.

3.The Tahsildar, Kadavur Taluk, Karur District.

... Respondents/Respondents PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 19.08.2025 made in W.P(MD)No.22543 of 2025 on the file of this Court.

1/6

For Appellant : Mr.M.Saravanan For Respondents : Mr.A.Kannan Additional Government Pleader

JUDGMENT

[Judgment of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.) Challenging the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P(MD)No.22543 of 2025 dated 19.08.2025, whereby the Writ Petition was dismissed, the writ petitioner has preferred the present Writ Appeal as the appellant.

2.The appellant/writ petitioner sought a direction to the first respondent to consider his representation dated 06.03.2025 and dispose of the same in accordance with law. In the said representation, the appellant primarily sought reconveyance of the subject property. 2/6

3.The learned Single Judge, after considering the materials available on record, dismissed the Writ Petition on the ground that the subject properties were not acquired by the Government under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, and that there was an absolute sale executed by the writ petitioner. Hence, the question of reconveyance did not arise. Aggrieved by the same, the writ petitioner has preferred the present Writ Appeal.

4.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

5.We have also perused the sale deed dated 29.07.1998 executed by the writ petitioner, which clearly evidences an absolute sale in favour of the State. Hence, the question of reconveyance does not arise at all. 3/6

6.In view of the above, we do not find any merit in the Writ Appeal. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs. [N.S.K.,J.] [M.J.R.,J.] 18.03.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No ps 4/6

To 1.The District Collector, O/o.District Collectorate Office, Thanthonimalai, Karur District.

2.The District Most Backward Class Welfare Officer, O/o.District Collector Office, Thanthonimalai, Karur District.

3.The Tahsildar, Kadavur Taluk, Karur District.

5/6

N.SATHISH KUMAR ,J.

and M.JOTHIRAMAN,J.

ps DATED : 18.03.2026 6/6