Madras High CourtWP(MD)/19939/2017disposed of

Lakhsmi, v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

2017-10-31Honourable Mr Justice R. Mahadevan3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :31.10.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P(MD)No.19939 of 2017 Lakhsmi ... Petitioner Vs.

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

2. The Special Tahsildar, Adhi Dravidar Welfare Department, Usilampatti, Madurai District.

3. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Thirumangalam taluk, Madurai District.

4. The Revenue Inspector, Pannikundu Firka, Tirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District.

5. The Village Administrative Officer, Pannikundu Village, Tirumanagalam Taluk, Madurai District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to issue Natham Patta for Adi Dravidar Housing Site in Survey No.55/23 situated at Pannikundu Village, Tirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District in the Petitioners name on the basis of the Petitioner's representation dated 28.07.2017. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Baskaran For Respondents : Mr.M.Alagathevan Special Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed, seeking to direct the respondents to issue Patta in Survey No.55/23 situated at Pannikundu Village, Tirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that neither civil suit nor rival claim whatsoever is pending in respect of the property in question. The petitioner's father was allotted the property in survey No.55/5, situated at Pannikundu Village, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai in the year 1962, by the government, which now remains as vacant site. While so, in the year 1987 Natham survey was conducted and the name has wrongly been entered in the records. The petitioner in order to get it corrected and also to obtain patta in favour of the petitioner, sent several representations to the respondents, but all ended in vain. Hence, the petitioner filed W.P(MD)No.20011 of 2014, wherein on 10.12.2014, it was ordered to dispose of the representations of the petitioner within a period of six weeks. Since no steps were taken thereafter also, the petitioner sent a representation dated 28.07.2017 to the first respondent that too kept pending without any action. Aggrieved over the inaction of the respondents, the petitioner is before this Court.

4.The Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the representation of the petitioner would be considered in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court.

5.Considering the limited scope of the relief sought in this writ petition, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 28.07.2017 and pass appropriate orders, on its own merits and in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as all the interested parties, if any, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

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

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(P&A) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar