Gopal M v. The Tashildar

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 05.06.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY M.Gopal ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Tashildar, Taluk Office, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai.

2. Sumathi

3. Veeramani

4. A.Parameshwari

5. Baskaran ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent dated 30.04.2026 as arbitrary and illegal and to quash the same and consequently directing the 1st respondent to issue separate patta in the name of the petitioner after cancelling the existing patta for S.No.23/2A measuring an extent of 0.18.0 Ares, Koolapandi Village of Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District, by conducting proper enquiry on the online application of the petitioner dated 30.01.2026. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu For R-1 : Mr.S.Siva Thilakar Counsel for State of Tamil Nadu 1/5

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned order passed by the first respondent dated 30.04.2026 and consequently directing the first respondent to issue separate patta in the name of the petitioner after cancelling the existing patta for S.No.23/2A measuring an extent of 0.18.0 Ares, Koolapandi Village of Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District, by conducting proper enquiry on the online application of the petitioner dated 30.01.2026.,

2. The petitioner claims title over the subject property based on the sale deeds executed by the private respondents. The husband of the second respondent, namely, Ramasubramani, and the third and fourth respondents are siblings. The fifth respondent is the legal heir of another sibling, namely, Pushpavalli. According to the petitioner, the subject property originally belonged to the family of the said persons. Subsequently, Ramasubramani and Veeramani sold their respective shares in the property and thereby, the petitioner is entitled to the entire extent of the property. However, the first respondent issued a joint patta including the names of names of the petitioner's sibling. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner submitted an application seeking to delete the names of the other respondents from the patta. Through the impugned order, the first respondent 2/5

rejected the petitioner's request on the ground that the petitioner had not furnished the four boundaries of the property.

3. On a perusal of the sale deeds, it is seen that the four boundaries of the property have been clearly mentioned therein, Therefore, the impugned order is a total non-application of mind. Accordingly, the impugned order is hereby quashed. Moreover, when the siblings have sold the property to the petitioner, the private respondents cannot continue to have their names included in the patta. Consequently, the matter is remitted back to the first respondent, who shall issue notice to the petitioner as well as respondents 2 to 5, grant them an opportunity of personal hearing and thereafter pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. With the above directions , this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

05.06.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes jbr 3/5

To:

The Tashildar, Taluk Office, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai.

4/5

S.SRIMATHY , J.

jbr ORDER MADE IN DATED : 05.06.2026 5/5