R.Murugan v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.08.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR W.P.(MD)No.11704 of 2024 and W.M.P(MD)No.10445 of 2024 R.Murugan ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi Town, 2.The Tashildar, Srivilliputhur Taluk Office, Srivilliputhur Town and Taluk, 3.The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Srivilliputhur Taluk Office, Srivilliputhur Town and Taluk, 4.The Village Administrative Officer, Poovani Village, Srivilliputhur Taluk and Town

...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the 3rd respondent made in Koppu No.2024/ 1/6

0103/26/224140, Srivilliputhur (02) Tashildar Office, dated 22.01.2024, and to quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 herein to make entry in the Online Patta by including the name of the petitioner for S.No.32/3 measuring an extent of 0.22.0 hect and S.No.32/2 measuring an extent of 0.03.0 hect in Muthuvenkatrayapuram Village, Srivilliputhur Taluk, after removing the name of the petitioner's father Ramaiah, within a stipulated period of time to be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu For Respondents : Mr.M.Gangatharan Government Advocate * * * * *

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the third respondent rejecting the application submitted by the petitioner seeking mutation of the revenue records in respect of the subject property situated at S.Nos.32/2 and 32/3 in Muthuvenkatarayapuram Village, Srivilliputhur Taluk, 2.Heard the arguments of Mr.M.Gangatharan, learned Government Advocate for the respondents.

2/6

3.According to the petitioner, his mother Mariyammal purchased 0.03.0 hectares in S.No.32/2 and 0.22.0 hectares in S.No.32/3, under sale deed dated 16.05.1983. The patta for the subject property situated in S.No.32/2, was issued in the name of the petitioner's father Ramaiah and one Muthu Irulan. The patta for the subject property situated in S.No.32/3, was issued in the name of the petitioner's father. Subsequently, the petitioner's mother executed a settlement deed dated 06.04.2004, in favour of the petitioner. Based on the said document, the petitioner applied for separate patta in his name. The second respondent passed an order on 19.05.2023, directing issue of separate patta in the name of the petitioner in respect of the property situated in S.No.

32/3 and joint patta in the name of the petitioner and one Muthu Irulan in respect of the property situated in S.No.32/2. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted an application on 13.09.2023, through online seeking issuance of patta in his name. The same has been rejected by the third respondent on the ground that the petitioner failed to submit a link document. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has come before this Court.

4.The learned Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the impugned order was passed without affording any reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and without verifying the documents filed along with the online application.

3/6

5.A perusal of the typed set of papers would suggest that the second respondent already passed orders in his proceedings in Ni.Mu.A.3/5461/2022, dated 19.05.2023, for issuance of patta in the name of the petitioner. Therefore, there cannot be any impediment for the third respondent to issue patta in the name of the petitioner as per the order passed by the second respondent. In any event, subsequently, the petitioner filed an online application along with necessary documents as seen from entry in the online application. However, the impugned order has been passed as if the petitioner failed to submit any legal documents. If the petitioner failed to submit the legal documents along with online application, it is for the third respondent to issue notice to the petitioner and afford reasonable opportunity to submit the necessary documents.

Instead of following the said fair procedure, the third respondent passed impugned order without affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. Hence, the same is vitiated by the violation of the principal of the natural justice. 6.

receipt of copy of this order after affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner.

7.Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is also closed. 25.08.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No RJR To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi Town, 2.The Tashildar, Srivilliputhur Taluk Office, Srivilliputhur Town and Taluk, 3.The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Srivilliputhur Taluk Office, Srivilliputhur Town and Taluk, 4.The Village Administrative Officer, Poovani Village, Srivilliputhur Taluk and Town 5/6

S.SOUNTHAR , J.

RJR W.P.(MD)No.11704 of 2024 25.08.2025 6/6