Aswin Venkatraman, v. The Assistant Commissioner

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.11.2015

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU W.P.(MD)No.4704 of 2014 1.Aswin Venkatraman 2.Hari Venkatraman 3.Revathi Devaraj .. Petitioners Vs.

1.The Assistant Commissioner of Land Reforms District Revenue Officer, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar Palani Taluk, Dindigul District.

3.M.Krishnan 4.S.Krishnan 5.S.Krishnan 6.A.Dhandapani 7.D.Ravichandran 8.M.Ganesan 9.Akkammal 10.K.Palanichamy 11.Arumugam 12.Subramani 13.Kaliammal (RR - 3 to 13 are impleaded vide order dated 16.10.2015) .. Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other order or direction in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the application dated 13.11.2013 for transfer of patta given by the petitioner to the 2nd Respondent which was forwarded to 1st Respondent and thus render justice.

For Petitioners :

Mr.S.Nates Raja For RR - 1 & 2 :

Mr.S.Kumar Addl.Govt.Pleader For RR - 3 to 13 :

Mr.D.Venkatesh

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed seeking for a mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's application dated 13.11.2013 seeking for grant of patta. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.In this writ petition the respondents 3 to 13 are private parties, got themselves impleaded as party respondents by contending that there is a civil dispute pending with regard to the title to the property, for which the petitioner has sought for patta.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has not disputed the fact that there is a civil suit pending by way of a suit in respect of the property in dispute, for which patta is sought for. When that being the factual position, this Court is of the view that no direction can be issued to the Revenue officials for considering the representation of the petitioners seeking for grant of patta.

4.Needless to say that the petitioners have to approach the authorities only after the suit is decided by the competent civil Court. Therefore, I find that the present application filed by the petitioners seeking for grant of patta before the revenue authorities is highly premature. Accordingly, this Court finds that no direction can be issued to the authorities to consider and pass orders thereon. Consequently, this writ petition is dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioners to renew their request if situation warrants to do so after the disposal of the civil suit. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(C.O) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar.

- To 1.The Assistant Commissioner of Land Reforms District Revenue Officer, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District. +One cc to M/s.D.Venkatesh, Advocate, SR.No.64691 +One cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR.No.64771 mj RL/5c/KBM/17/11/2015 W.P.(MD)No.4704 of 2014 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 03.11.2015