Madras High CourtWP(MD)/14594/2015dismissed as infructuous

M.Shanmugaiah Thevar v. The District Revenue Officer

2017-11-02Honourable Mr Justice R. Mahadevan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.11.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P.(MD)Nos.14594 of 2015 & 6981 of 2016 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 & of 2015 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.5964 & 5965 of 2016 M.Shanmugaiah Thevar ... Petitioner in W.P(MD)No.14594/15 M.Muthu Pandi ... Petitioner in W.P(MD)No.6981/16 Vs.

1.The District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

3.The Thasildar, Sankarankovil Taluk, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

4.Malathi ... Respondents in both petitions COMMON PRAYER:Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus or any other or direction, more in the form of Writ, by calling for the records, pertaining to the impugned order, passed by the 2nd respondent, vide No. Na.Ka.A1/5538/2014, dated 30.04.2015 and quash the same as illegal and thereby directing the 2nd and 3rd Respondents, to keep the patta No.1979, in Vadakkupanavadali revenue village, in Sankarankovil Taluk, in Tirunelveli District, with the existing pattadars' names and existing lands . For Petitioners : Mr.F.X.Eugene For Respondents : Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthiah, Government Advocate for R.1 to R.3 Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu for R.4 (In both petitions) ***** https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

COMMON ORDER As the issue involved in both the cases are similar in nature, they are disposed of by this common order.

2. These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking to quash the impugned order of the second respondent dated 30.04.2015 and to direct the second and third respondents to keep the Patta No.1979 Vadakkupanavadali Revenue Village, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District, with the existing pattadars' names.

3. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 as well as the learned Counsel appearing for the fourth respondent.

4. When the matter is taken up for hearing, it has been reported by the learned counsel on either side that subsequent to the filing of these petitions, an order dated 21.03.2017 came to be passed by the second respondent, in this subject matter and the learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are now inclined to challenge the same.

5. Such being the case, no further order is required to be passed in these petitions and the same are disposed of accordingly, with liberty to the petitioners to challenge the subsequent order dated 21.03.2017. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Crl.Side) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

3.The Thasildar, Sankarankovil Taluk, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

+2ccs to The Special Government Pleader, SR.Nos.85398 and 85399 +2ccs to M/s.F.X.Eugene, Advocate, SR.Nos.85086 and 85087 +One cc to M/s.M.Thirunavukkarasu, Advocate, SR.No.84985 gk RL/9C/2P/KK/SAR4/15/11/2017 W.P.(MD)Nos.14594 of 2015 & 6981 of 2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 02.11.2017