Kamalam v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.08.2015 Coram THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH W.P.(MD).No.14766 of 2015 Kamalam : Petitioner vs.

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srirangam Revenue Divisional Office, Trichy District.

2.The Tahsildar, Manapparai Taluk, Manapparai, Trichy District.

: Respondents Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to dispose of the petitioner's application, seeking patta in respect of survey No.382/3, for an extent of 26 cents, situated at Pannapatti Melpakam Village, Manapparai Taluk, Trichy District, based on the petitioner's application, dated 13.07.2015. For Petitioner : M/s.C.Bharathi For Respondents : Mr.M.Murugan, Govt.Advocate.

ORDER

The Writ Petition has been filed, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to dispose of the petitioner's application, seeking patta in respect of survey No.382/3, for an extent of 26 cents, situated at Pannapatti Melpakam Village, Manapparai Taluk, Trichy District, based on the petitioner's application, dated 13.07.2015.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has purchased the land measuring to an extent of 26 cents in Survey No.382/3, situated at Pannapatti Melpakam Village, Manapparai Taluk, Trichy District, by way of sale deeds, dated 04.06.1979, 31.08.1978 and 23.10.1986, for total extent of 4 Acres 36 cents. Out of 4 Acres 36 Cents, petitioner has been granted patta only for an extent of 4 Acres 10 cents. For remaining 26 cents, the petitioner has not been granted patta, inspite of several applications sent to the respondents. Hence, the petitioner has made a representation on 13.07.2015 to the respondents and the same was not considered so far. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

3. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Government Advocate vehemently opposed to direct the respondents https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

to consider the representations of the petitioner stating that though the petitioner had stated that he has purchased the land measuring to an extent of 4 Acres 36 cents, he has not produced any documents, to substantiate his contention, in the typed set of papers.

4. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is preferred to produce all necessary documents before the respondents, to substantiate his claim. Thus, he sought for a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider his representation.

5. In view of the submissions made on either side, this Court passes the following order.

The petitioner is directed to give a fresh representation to the 2nd respondent along with a copy of this order, within a period of one week, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, with necessary documents. In the event of receipt of such representation, along with necessary documents, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders on the same, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks, thereafter. This Court made it clear that this Court is not expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the claim made by the petitioner.

6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (T&P) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srirangam Revenue Divisional Office, Trichy District.

2. The Tahsildar, Manapparai Taluk, Manapparai, Trichy District.

+ 1 CC TO MR.C.BHARATHI, ADVOCATE IN SR NO. 47577 + 1 CC TO SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER IN SR NO. 47781 MPK TE/SK-SKN/SAR(J) 04/09/2015 2P/5C W.P.(MD).No.14766 of 2015 18.08.2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/