Madras High CourtWP(MD)/6463/2026disposed of

E.Thirupathi v. The Secretary

2026-03-11Honourable Mrs Justice S.Srimathy7 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.03.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY E.Thirupathi ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, St.George Fort, Chennai - 600 009.

2. The Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

3. The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

4. The District Revenue Officer, Madurai District, Madurai.

5. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur Sub Division, Narasingapatti, Vellaripatti Post, Melur, Madurai District.

1/7

6. The Tahsildar, Melur Taluk Officer, Melur, Madurai District.

... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to restore the petitioner's patta No.586 issued in respect of S.No.13/1B, punja land, measuring to an extent of 0.84.0 Ares, situates at Thaniyamangalam Village, Melur Taluk, Madurai District in the light of Judgement and Decree passed in O.S.No.99 of 2021 dated 17.09.2025 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Melur and to change the entries in all the revenue records in respect of S.No.13/1B in the petitioner's name.

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Vinothkumar For R-1 to R-6 : Mr.S.Shanmugavel Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to restore the petitioner's patta No.586 issued in respect of S.No.13/1B, punja land, measuring to an extent of 0.84.0 Ares, situates at Thaniyamangalam Village, Melur Taluk, Madurai District in the light of Judgement and Decree passed in O.S.No.99 of 2021 dated 17.09.2025 on 2/7

the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Melur and to change the entries in all the revenue records in respect of S.No.13/1B in the petitioner's name.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that he is entitled to the property through a sale deed dated 31.08.1981 vide Document No.2900/1981. Patta No. 586 was also issued to the petitioner. Subsequently, the same was cancelled stating that the land in question is a Panchami land. The petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.8246 of 2020 with a prayer for Mandamus, directing the respondents to receive tax. However, the said writ petition was dismissed, vide order, dated 09.09.2020, stating that the revenue records were not standing in the name of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner was directed to approach the competent Court to establish his rights.

3. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.99 of 2021 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Melur. The said suit was filed for declaration of title, permanent injunction, and to declare the cancellation of patta as null and void. The said suit was allowed. In the said suit, it has been categorically held that the land is not Panchami land, but belongs to the petitioner, and that it is classified as Ryotwari Punjai. The relevant portion is extracted hereunder: 3/7

"......Hence from the available evidences on record there is no proof filed on the defendants side to show that the lands in S.No.13/1B was categorized as Panjamar Lands and there is no Government Gazette notification to prove the same or no assignment order issued by the goverrument that S.No.13/1B is declared as Panjamar Tharisu Comparatively, the plaintiff's father has purchased the suit property from one Mr. Vairavan Chettiar S/o.Ramanathan Chettiar by way of Ex.Al dated 31.08.1981. Prior to that the suit property has been in possession and enjoyment of Mr. Vairavan in S.No.13/1 in Thaniyamangalam Village. This is evident from Government Revenue Records marked as Ex.A20 with respect to S.No.13/1 extending Acre 4.16 Cents in Thaniyamangalam Village. Hence the Government record marked as Ex B2 shows that plaintiff is the owner of S.No. 13/1B which has been classified as Ryotwari Punjai in Patta No.

586. Ex.B2 has been hand written as Panjamar Tharisu with respect to S.No.13/18 Thaniyamangalam Village but no corresponding assignment order or Government Gazette notification has been included with the mention about Parnjamar Tharisu in the A Register extract. This has been admitted by DW2 in his cross examination.

Hence on the strength of the plaintiff side documents marked as ExA1, A2, A3, A20, A5, A6, A4, A7, A8, A9, A10, A11, A12, A13, A14 the plaintiff has proved that the suit property has been in possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff. If the suit property has been classified as Panjamar Tharisu, it would be mentioned in the land resurvey settlement register. It has not been mentioned as Panjamar Tharisu no where in the document marked as Ex. A19. Hence the plaintiff proved that the suit property is the Ryotwari Punjai Patta land issued in the name of 4/7

one Mr.Vairavari Chettiar who in turn sold the property to the plaintiff's father Mr.Iralpidungi in the year 1981 by way of sale deed marked as Ex.A1. Patta has also been granted in the name of the plaintiff in Patta No.586.

Hence these issues have been answered in favour of the plaintiff....."

4. In view of the above, the petitioner is now seeking to restorae of his patta. The sixth respondent / Tahsildar is directed to restore the patta in the petitioner's name in the light of the judgment and decree dated 17.09.2025 passed in O.S.No.99 of 2021. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

11.03.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes jbr 5/7

To: