Pasupathi .M v. The Revenue Divisional Officer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.07.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR M.Pasupathi ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.
2. The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, Manur, Tirunelveli District.
3. N.Rajagopal @ Muppudathi
4. Sarjan Realities Private Limited.
5. Raju Spinning Mills Private Limited
6. Mark Data Power & Energy Limited, No.27, Nagarjuna Hills, Punjagutta, Hyderabad - 500 082.
7. Muthoot FinCorp Limited, Muthoot Centre, Punnen Road, Trivandrum - 695 034.
1/5
8. Sun Street Solar Private Limited, No.401, 4th Floor, Shree Guru Harikrishnan Bhavan, Charat Singh Colony, A.K.Road, Andheri East, Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400 093.
9. CSE Deccan Solar Private Limited, No.401, 4th Floor, Shree Guru Harikrishnan Bhavan, Charat Singh Colony, A.K.Road, Andheri, East, Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400 093.
... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents No.1 and 2 to expedite the enquiry based on the petitioner's representation dated 25.05.2022 to cancel the patta No.1166 issued in favour of the respondents No.4 to 7 and Patta No.8561 and 8562 issued in favour of the respondents No.8 and 9 within a time frame as fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Robinson For R1 & R2 : Mr.S.Shanmugavel Additional Government Pleader For R8 & R9 : Mr.H.Lakshmi Shankar 2/5
ORDER
The present writ petition has been filed seeking for a Mandamus, directing the first respondent herein to dispose of an appeal arising out of Patta Pass Book Act.
2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner along with two others have filed an appeal before the first respondent herein on 25.05.2022, which has been acknowledged by the first respondent on 26.05.2022. The limited prayer of the petitioner is for expeditious disposal of the said appeal. At the time of admission, the learned Counsel for the respondents No.8 and 9 appeared and he contended that with regard to the same property, already civil proceedings were initiated and they have culminated as against the ancestors of the writ petitioner. Hence, the learned counsel for the respondents No.8 and 9 contended that the petitioner is attempting to resurrect the old issue. He further contends that so far the respondents have not received notice in the appeal which is said to have been presented by the writ petitioner.
3/5
3. I have carefully considered the submissions made on either side.
4. Considering the limited scope of the prayer in the writ petition, there shall be a direction to the first respondent herein to dispose of the appeal presented by the writ petitioner along with others as expeditiously as possible after giving due opportunity to the writ petitioner and the private respondents and pass orders in accordance with law.
5. With the above said observations, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
05.07.2022 Index :
Yes / No Internet :
Yes / No jbr 4/5
R.
VIJAYAKUMAR ,J.
jbr To
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.
2. The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, Manur, Tirunelveli District.
Order made in 05.07.2022 5/5