Madras High CourtWP(MD)/15954/2016dismissed

Rengasamy Konar, v. The Tahsildar

2016-09-06Honourable Mr Justice V. Bharathidasan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.09.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN W.P.(MD)No.15954 of 2016 Rengasamy Konar ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Tahsildar, Pudukottai & District.

2. Sathiyamoorthy ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation, dated 28.06.2016 within a reasonable time. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Balakrishnan For R1 : Mr.R.Anandharaj Government AdvocAte For R2 : Mr.S.Poornachandran

O R D E R

The writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the first respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation, dated 28.06.2016, within a reasonable time.

2. According to the petitioner, an extent of 0.15.0 ares of land in Survey No.289/15 in Patta No.26, Aathanakottai Village, Pudukottai Taluk and District belongs to him. The first respondent/Tahsildar, Pudukottai, without any enquiry, transferred the Patta in favour of the second respondent. In the above circumstances, he made a representation to the first respondent to re-transfer the same in his favour.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Pleader and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. Admittedly, already the Tahsildar has passed an order transferring the Patta in favour of the second respondent, now only remedy open to the petitioner is to challenge the said order before the appropriate authority, in a manner known to law.

5. In view of the same, the present writ petition, seeking a direction to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 28.06.2016, is not maintainable. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to file an appeal before the appropriate authority, as per law, if she is so advised. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the copy of the order passed by the first respondent has not been served on the petitioner, hence, the first respondent is directed to serve the copy of the order transferring patta in favour of the second respondent to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Tahsildar, Pudukottai & District.

+ 1 CC TO Mr.N.BALAKRISHNAN, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 51075 + 1 CC TO Mr.S.POORNA CHANDRAN, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 50835 + 1 CC TO SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER IN SR No. 50578 AKV TE/DB : 23/09/2016 : 2P/5C W.P.(MD)No.15954 of 2016 06.09.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/