Pichaikannu v. The District Revenue Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.02.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI Pichaikannu .... Petitioner /Vs./ 1.The District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

2.The Sub-Collector, Seranmahadevi Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

3.The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) Chennai-Kanyakumari Industrial Corridor Project, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

4.The Tahsildar, Seranmahadevi Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

5.Srirengam ... Respondents P RAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating 1/5

with the impugned order of the second respondent in his proceedings dated 15.03.2024 in Ni.Mu.1507/2024/A3 and quash the same as illegal and consequently restore the earlier position in the revenue records. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Saravana Kumar For R1 to R4 : Mr.S.Kameswaran Government Advocate

ORDER

The petitioner challenges the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, dated 15.03.2024 in Ni.Mu.1507/2024/A3.

2. On going through the impugned order which is challenged in the present writ petition, I find that the Revenue Divisional Officer has passed a detailed and considered order and in any event, the said order is appealable under Section 13 of the Patta Passbook Act. The appeal ought to have been preferred within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer. However, the writ petitioner has approached this Court and filed the instant writ petition, without availing the statutory remedy available to him under the Act. 2/5

3. In view of the above, liberty is granted to the petitioner to move an appeal before the first respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. In the event of such appeal being preferred within a period of four weeks, then the issue of limitation may not be put against the petitioner and the District Revenue Officer shall consider the appeal on its own merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks, thereafter. In the event of the original impugned order having been filed along with this writ petition, the same may be returned to the counsel for the petitioner across an acknowledgment being examined, within a period of two weeks from today.

4. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Index : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No 14.02.2025 am 3/5

TO:- 1.The District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

2.The Sub-Collector, Seranmahadevi Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

3.The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) Chennai-Kanyakumari Industrial Corridor Project, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

4.The Tahsildar, Seranmahadevi Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

4/5

P.B. BALAJI , J.

am Order made in Dated:

14.02.2025 5/5