N.Rasu, v. The District Revenue Officer,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED 22.09.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM W.P(MD)No.18008 of 2017 N.Rasu ..Petitioner Vs 1.The District Revenue Officer, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.
3.The Tahsildar, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
..Respondents.
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the District Revenue Officer, the first respondent herein to pass appropriate orders in the enquiry conducted on 15.10.2015 based on the enquiry report dated 23.3.2015 submitted by the Revenue Divisional Officer to the first respondent thereby granting patta in the name of the Petitioner and his legal heirs by considering the representation, dated 31.8.2017. For Petitioner :M/s.S.Sivathilakar For Respondents :Mr.A.Muthukaruppan Addl.Govt.Pleader
ORDER
The prayer in the Writ Petition is for a direction to the District Revenue Officer, the first respondent herein to pass appropriate orders in the enquiry conducted on 15.10.2015 based on the enquiry report dated 23.3.2015 submitted by the Revenue Divisional Officer to the first respondent thereby granting patta in the name of the Petitioner and his legal heirs by considering the representation, dated 31.8.2017.
2.Mr.A.Muthukaruppan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents.
3.By consent of both parties, the main Writ Petition is taken up for disposal, at the admission stage itself. 4.According to the Petitioner, he is the absolute owner of 3 acres 58 cents out of 9 acres 16 cents in S.No.931/1 of Maraneri Village, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District. While conducting Updating Record Survey, the name of one S.Shanmugaraj was wrongly included as joint pattadhar. Hence he gave a representation to rectify the said mistake.
5.The learned counsel for the Petitioner would further submit that based on the representation, the second respondent has already conducted enquiry and submitted a report to the first respondent in the year 2015, but the first respondent has not passed any orders till date. Hence the present Writ Petition. 6.The learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that it would suffice if a direction is given to the first respondent to consider the representation of the Petitioner, dated 31.08.2017 within the time frame fixed by this Court.
7.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the representation of the Petitioner will be considered as per law, within the time frame fixed by this Court.
8.Considering the submission made by the learned counsels, without going into the merits of the case, this Court directs the first respondent to consider the the representation of the Petitioner, dated 31.08.2017 on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders on the same, after giving notice to the Petitioner and other interested parties, if any, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order 9.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Writs) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar
To 1.The District Revenue Officer, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.
3.The Tahsildar, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
+1cc to M/S.S.SIVA THILAKAR, Advocate SR.No.80717 +1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No.81124 VSN MAS/KP/SAR1:04.10.2017:3P-6C W.P(MD)No.18008 of 2017 22.09.2017