← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/12934/2017disposed of

A.Sonaimuthu, v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

2017-07-13Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13.07.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM W.P.(MD)No.12934 of 2017 A.Sonaimuthu ...Petitioner Vs.

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai District, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar, Vadipatti Taluk, Vadipatti, Madurai District. ...Respondents PRAYER:Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to pass appropriate order on the representation / Application No.2017/0105/24/026328 of the petitioner dated 18.03.2017 based on the order of the first respondent in Nee.Mu.No.6612/2016 dated 12.01.2017 within the time limit stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner :Mr.M.Jegadeesh Pandian For Respondents :Mr.C.Selvaraj Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed seeking for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to pass appropriate order on the representation/Application No.2017/0105/24/026328 of the petitioner dated 18.03.2017, based on the order of the first respondent in Nee.Mu.No.6612/2016 dated 12.01.2017.

2.Mr.C.Selvaraj, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 3.The case of the petitioner is that out of 1 acre 78 cents in Survey No.75/5B of Achambatti Village,Vadipatti Taluk,Madurai District, 10 cents were settled in favour of the petitioner by his father on 15.05.1979. Since then, he has been in possession and enjoyment of the property.

4.The petitioner would allege that the name of one Gunabalan S/o Subbaian and name of his brothers were wrongly included in the patta in respect of the land in Survey No.75/5B. Aggrieved over the action, the neighbouring land owner, namely, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Gunapalan preferred an appeal before the first respondent. After conducting enquiry, the first respondent has passed a detailed order on 12.01.2017 directing the second respondent to pass orders based on the documents produced by the respective parties. 5.The grievances of the petitioner is that though the first respondent has issued a direction in the month of January 2017, the second respondent has not passed any order so far. Hence, the petitioner sent a representation on 18.03.2017. Even thereafter, no order has been passed. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

6.Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for by the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner, directs the second respondent to pass orders on the representation/Application No.2017/0105/24/026328 of the petitioner, dated 18.03.2017, on merits and in accordance with law, after providing opportunity to all necessary parties, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AE) / True Copy / Sub Assistant Registrar(C.S.) To:

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai District, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar, Vadipatti Taluk,Vadipatti,Madurai District.

+1cc to M/S.M.JEGADEESH PANDIAN, Advocate SR.No.65833 +1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No.65634 vsg/skn MAS/KP/SAR2:07.08.2017:2P-5C W.P.(MD)No.12934 of 2017 13.07.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/