M.Eswari v. The Tahsildar

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.7698, 7700 and 7701 of 2025 M.Eswari ... Petitioner vs.

1.The Tahsildar, O/o. Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram Taluk, Madurai.

2.The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram Taluk, Madurai.

3.Ulaganathan 4.Sivasheela ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 2nd respondent in T.R.No. 2024/0103/24/322041TR dated 30.05.2024 and the consequential order passed by the same respondent in T.R.2024/24/17/001822SD dated 1/5

14.06.2024 and to quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the 1st respondent to restore the status quo ante with reference to the patta No.2247 for S.F.No.215/2C1 in Perungudi Village, Thirupparankundram Taluk, Madurai District within a time frame as stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner :Mr.S.Ramanathan For R1 and R2 :Mr.C.Satheesh Government Advocate *****

O R D E R

The petitioner challenges the order of the second respondent in T.R.No.2024/0103/24/322041TR dated 30.05.2024 and the consequential order passed by the second respondent in T.R.2024/24/17/001822SD dated 14.06.2024.

2.Heard Mr.S.Ramanathan, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.C.Satheesh, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2. By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission 2/5

stage.

3.The primordial contention of the Writ Petitioner is that without any notice to the Writ Petitioner, acting on the representation/request of the private respondents 3 and 4, their names have been included in the patta. The learned Counsel for the petitioner also took me through the impugned order and would contend that there is absolutely no reference to any notice being issued to the Writ Petitioner in whose name patta already stands.

4.The learned Government Advocate would fairly submit that no opportunity has been given to the Writ Petitioner before the order impugned in this Writ Petition came to be passed. 6.On this limited ground, I am inclined to interfere with the impugned orders and accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remitted to the second respondent for fresh consideration of the application of the third respondent and after giving an opportunity to the petitioner as well as to 3/5

the respondents 3 and 4, the second respondent shall pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Index :Yes / No 16.04.2025 Internet :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No cmr To 1.The Tahsildar, O/o. Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram Taluk, Madurai.

2.The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram Taluk, Madurai.

4/5

P.B.BALAJI, J.

cmr 16.04.2025 5/5