S.Syed Ismail v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

1 W.P.(MD)NO.16153 OF 2024 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.07.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)No.16153 of 2024 AND W.M.P.(MD)Nos.14040 & 14041 of 2024 S.Syed Ismail, President, Ismail Khan Ghori Vagayara Jamath, Seethakaathi Street, Sammanthapuram, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Sivakasi West, Virudhunagar District.

2. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

... Respondents Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pursuant to the impugned order passed by the second respondent in Na.Ka.A1/6355/2201 dated 22.01.2024 and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to issue patta to the petitioner Vagayara for the land in Town Survey No.1, Block No.19, Ward-A, Seethakathi Street, Sammanthapuram Village, Rajapalayam Taluk.

1/4

2 W.P.(MD)NO.16153 OF 2024 For Petitioner : Mr.Lakshmi Gopinathan, for M/s.Polax Legal Solutions.

For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh, Additional Government Pleader.

* * *

O R D E R

Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner had questioned the impugned proceedings by filing an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi. The case of the petitioner is that the petition mentioned land has been utilised as burial ground by the petitioner Jamath since time immemorial. It is also stated that the entries in the settlement records would bear this out. The petitioner approached the second respondent for issuance of patta. Instead of honouring the petitioner's request, what happened was something seriously adverse to the petitioner's interest. The petitioner's request has been rejected. The second respondent did not stop there. The second respondent went to the extent of holding that the burial ground shall be made open to all Muslims' sects and persuasions. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has gone before the first respondent. Serious questions have been raised by the petitioner. 2/4

3 W.P.(MD)NO.16153 OF 2024

3. It is just and proper that the first respondent decides the same. There is merit in the contention of the petitioner's counsel that if interim relief is not granted, the appeal itself may become infructuous. The first respondent is directed to dispose of the appeal on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till final order is passed in the petitioner's appeal, the impugned order shall be put on hold and kept in abeyance and not implemented. I make it clear that I have not gone into the merits of the matter. This writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 22.07.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No PMU Note : Issue order copy on 08.08.2024.

To:

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Sivakasi West, Virudhunagar District.

2. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

3/4

4 W.P.(MD)NO.16153 OF 2024 G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.

PMU W.P.(MD)No.16153 of 2024 22.07.2024 4/4