Madras High CourtWP(MD)/3651/2015disposed of

V. Jesuraj v. The Tahsildar

2015-03-17Honourable Mr Justice B. Rajendran2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :17.03.2015

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN W.P(MD).Nos.3651 to 3653 of 2015 V.JESURAJ .. Petitioner in W.P.No.3651 of 2015 J.NATARAJAN .. Petitioner in W.P.No.3652 of 2015 M.MARIA NEPOLEON .. Petitioner in W.P.No.3653 of 2015 Vs.

1. THE TAHSILDAR, THENKASI TALUK, TIURNELVELI DISTRICT.

2. J. SELVARAJ .. Respondents in all the writ petitions Common Prayer:- Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioners' dated 06.02.2015 in order to participate the ongoing patta proceedings as per the direction issued by this Court in W.P.NO.888 of 2013, vide order dated 27.03.2013. For petitioner in all writ petitions : Mr.L.Madhusudhanan For 1st Respondent in all writ petitions : Mr.S.Chandrasekar Government Advocate

ORDER

Mr.S.Chandrasekar, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents.

2. By consent, these writ petitions are taken up for final disposal.

3. The petitioner is a purchaser even way back in the year 1991-1992. There is a dispute between the vendor and his brother. Earlier writ petition was filed and in that writ https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

petition, this Court directed that in the patta proceedings of the vendor's brother, notices should be given to all the parties. Subsequently, another writ petition was filed in respect of an adjoining owner and this Court already directed the Tahsildar to consider the representation for participation in the patta proceedings and pass an order. The petitioners are also similarly placed persons as that of the petitioners in W.P.(MD)No.11096 of 2013. They have also made a representation on 06.02.2015 to the first respondent. But so far, no order has been passed.

4. The second respondent is the applicant in the patta proceedings. What the petitioners require is only to allow them to participate in the proceedings initiated by the second respondent.

5. The learned Government Advocate would state that the representation of the petitioners would be considered in accordance with law, as the second respondent is the party in the patta proceedings.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate.

7. Following the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.11096 of 2013, dated 19.09.2014, the first respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioners and permit them to take part in the hearing relating to the grant of patta in respect of the claim made by the second respondent, if the representation is not disposed of till date.

8. With the above directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Crl.Side) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To THE TAHSILDAR, THENKASI TALUK, TIURNELVELI DISTRICT.

+1cc to Mr.L.Madhusudhanan,Advocate Sr.No.12494 +1cc to Spl.Government Pleader Sr.No. 13190 rj2 AA/08.04.2015/2p- 4c/ W.P(MD).Nos.3651 to 3653 of 2015 17.03.2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/