A.Santhanam v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY A.Santhanam ...

Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, District Collector Office, Madurai, Madurai District.

2. The District Revenue Divisional Officer, District Collector Office, Madurai, Madurai District.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur, Madurai District.

4. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Madurai East, Madurai District. ... Respondents 1/6

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to rectify the mistake of pathway and restore the same as Survey No.80/14 Old Survey No.37 is vacant land situated at V.Alagapuri, Appan Thiruppathi Revenue Village, Madurai District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 29.12.2025 and issue vacant site patta in the petitioner's name within a stipulated time as may be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Balasubramanian For Respondents : Mr.SRA.Ramachandran Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

This petition has been filed seeking to direct the respondents to rectify the mistake of pathway and restore the same as Survey No.80/14 Old Survey No.37 is vacant land situated at V.Alagapuri, Appan Thiruppathi Revenue Village, Madurai District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 29.12.2025 and issue vacant site patta in the petitioner's name within a stipulated time as may be fixed by this Court.

2/6

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Survey No. 80/14, previously assigned as Old No. 37, is vacant land that belongs to Andiservai, the petitioner's father, but it has been incorrectly recorded as a pathway in the UDR. As a result, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents, yet no action has been taken. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. The learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents submitted that the entry was made during the UDR scheme.

4. On perusal of the records it reveals that the respondents classified the land as Government Natham Poramboke. This Court is of the opinion that the classification as Natham and Government, is erroneous. Further, it is noted that during UDR, Survey No. 37, encompassing an area of 1.09.5, was classified as Government Poramboke. Therefore, the UDR classification is incorrect. 3/6

5. In light of the facts, this Court directs the second respondent to review the petitioner's claim, taking into account the earlier 'A' Register and SLR records, and to conduct a proper enquiry. Thereafter, the second respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders within four months from the date of receiving a copy of this order.

6. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 17.03.2026 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes NCC : Yes / No msrm 4/6

To

1. The District Collector, District Collector Office, Madurai, Madurai District.

2. The District Revenue Divisional Officer, District Collector Office, Madurai, Madurai District.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur, Madurai District.

4. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Madurai East, Madurai District.

5. The Additional Government pleader, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai 5/6

S.SRIMATHY, J msrm Order made in 17.03.2026 6/6