A.Murugalakshmi v. The District Revenue Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 26.03.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY and W.M.P(MD)No.6565 of 2026 A.Murugalakshmi ... Petitioner Vs

1. The District Revenue Officer, District Collectorate Complex, Dindigul, Dindigul District - 624 004.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Bazaar, Dindigul, Dindigul District - 624 001.

3. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Athur, Athur Taluk, Dindigul District.

4. Palanisamy @ Pethanasamy

5. Mallika

6. Manju

7. Sanju

8. Sudha ... Respondents 1/6

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire records relating to the impugned proceeding dated 17.02.2026 in Na.Ka.No. 4186455/2026/A4, passed by the 1st respondent and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to maintain the patta Nos.1760 and 401 for the property in S.No.1401/2, of an extent of 17 cents, S.No.1403/2, of an extent of 1 acre 76 cents, S.No.1404/1, of an extent of 1 acre 23 cents and S.No.1402/2, of an extent of 99 cents, situated at Athur village, Athur Taluk, Dindigul District, which includes all the legal heirs of Vairava Gowder as stood prior to the passing of impugned proceeding.

For Petitioner : Mr.R Thangapandian For R-1 to R-3 : Mr.T.Amjadkhan Government Advocate

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned order dated 17.02.2026 passed by the first respondent and consequently to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to maintain the patta Nos.1760 and 401 for the property in S.No.1401/2, of an extent of 17 cents, S.No.1403/2, of an extent of 1 acre 76 cents, S.No.1404/1, of an extent of 1 acre 23 cents and S.No.1402/2, of an extent of 99 cents, situated at Athur village, Athur Taluk, Dindigul District, which includes all the legal heirs of 2/6

Vairava Gowder as stood prior to the passing of impugned proceeding.,

2. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner's father namely Vaira Gowdar was entitled to the properties as a self acquired properties since he had purchased it out of his own income, vide Document No.561 of 1973 dated 23.03.1973. Therefore, all his legal heirs, including five daughters and two sons, are entitled to the properties. However, the patta was issued only in favour of the two sons, namely Palanisamy @ Pethanasamy and Mallaiyasamy. Subsequently, Mallaiyasamy and the petitioner's father, Vairava Gowder, passed away. However, the daughters have claimed right over the property and filed a petition before the third respondent / Tahsildar, who had dismissed the petition.

Aggrieved over the same, they preferred an appeal before the second respondent / Revenue Divisional Officer, who directed to issue joint patta including the names of the daughters. Aggrieved over the same, the sons and their legal heirs filed a revision petition before the District Revenue Officer, who had passed the impugned order rejecting the claim of the daughters and directed the parties to approach the competent Civil Court to establish their rights. Aggrieved over the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. Since the Vairava Gowder died interstate in the year 1978 itself, the inheritance rights opened from 1978. The daughters had not initiated any 3/6

proceedings for partition at that time. Even if they are entitled to the properties, the same must be established before the competent Civil Court by producing appropriate evidence. Therefore, the petitioner cannot straight away claim joint patta to be issued in the name of the daughters.

4. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the official respondents does not have any right to confer title to the daughters unless itheir rights are established before the competent Civil Court. Accordingly, the impugned order is absolutely right. The petitioner is at liberty to approach the competent Civil Court for appropriate relief.

5. With the above observations, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

26.03.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes jbr 4/6

To:

1. The District Revenue Officer, District Collectorate Complex, Dindigul, Dindigul District - 624 004..

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Bazaar, Dindigul, Dindigul District - 624 001.

3. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Athur, Athur Taluk, Dindigul District.

5/6

S.SRIMATHY , J.

jbr ORDER MADE IN DATED : 26.03.2026 6/6