C.Muthuraman v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.04.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI C.Muthuraman : Petitioner Vs.

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur Revenue Divisional Office, Melur Taluk, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar, Melur Taluk, Madurai District.

: Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to conduct an enquiry and make Name Corrections in his Patta No.314 (S.No.146/4B) of Seminipatti Village, Melur Taluk, Madurai District as Chithamparam Pillai son of Muthuraman Pillai instead of Muthuraman Pillai son of Chithamparam Pillai based on his representation dated 05.03.2025 within the time limit that may be stipulated by this Honourable Court.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mohanasundaram For Respondents : Mrs.S.Jeyapriya Government Advocate

O R D E R

The petitioner sought for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, seeking direction to the respondents to conduct enquiry and carry out name corrections in Patta No.314.

2.The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner's name and the petitioner's father's name have been interchanged in the patta. Though it is contended that even before computerisation of the revenue records, according to the petitioner, the correction was made manually and the same mistake has been carried forward in the computerisation also. Therefore, the petitioner has sought for necessary corrections to be carried out, by making a representation on 05.03.2025.

3.Learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents.

4.Considering the fact that the petitioner seeks very limited relief of carrying out correction in the names of the petitioner and 2/5

the petitioner's father in the Patta bearing No.314, it would suffice to dispose of the Writ Petition, directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application and if the petitioner's claim is found to be entertainable, then necessary corrections shall be carried out by the second respondent himself. However, in the event of the mistake occurring during the UDR survey, then the second respondent shall forward the application of the petitioner to the District Revenue Officer, Madurai, who shall pass necessary orders on receipt of the file from the second respondent within a period of twelve [12] weeks thereafter.

5.Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

02.04.2025 Index :Yes / No Internet : Yes / No NCC : Yes/No MR 3/5

To 1.The District Revenue Officer, Madurai.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur Revenue Divisional Office, Melur Taluk, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar, Melur Taluk, Madurai District.

4/5

P.B.BALAJI.

, J.

MR 02.04.2025 5/5