A.Pandi v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI A.Pandi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Madurai, Madurai District.

2.The Tahsildar, O/o. the Tahsildar, Madurai North, Madurai.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to register the petitioner name as a lessee in the lease register which is maintaining before the 2nd respondent office on the basis of the petitioner's representation, dated 27.01.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Subramanian For Respondents : Mr.M.Lingadurai Special Government Pleader 1/4

O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner A.Subramanian, the learned Special Government Pleader Mr.M.Lingadurai for the respondents and Mr.P.Gunasekaran for the land owners.

2. The petitioner claims to be a cultivating tenant under the vendors of the present owners who are represented by Mr.P.Gunasekaran. Though the said owners are not made parties to the writ petition, Mr.P.Gunasekaran contends that the petitioner is not a cultivating tenant and his earlier attempts to include his name have been rejected by the Tashildar. According to Mr.P.Gunasekaran, the present writ petition is not maintainable.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, would submit that the petitioner has been cultivating Paddy in the subject lands and his legitimate request for inclusion of his name as lessee in the lease register can be considered on merits. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that, an application has been made in this regard on 27.01.2025 to the 2nd respondent.

2/4

4. I am unable to see how this Court can grant relief of such a nature. There is a special enactment to determine the status and rights of the writ petitioner as to whether he is a cultivating tenant and as to whether his name can be entered in the tenancy register. Therefore, if at all the petitioner has any grievance, the petitioner has to take recourse only under the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act and not approach this Court seeking remedy under Article 226 of Constitution of India.

5. In view of the above, giving liberty to the petitioner to make appropriate application before the relevant statute, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

17.04.2025 NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no gbg To:

1.The District Collector, Madurai, Madurai District.

2.The Tahsildar, O/o. the Tahsildar, Madurai North, Madurai.

3/4

P.B.BALAJI , J.

gbg 17.04.2025 4/4