S.Periyasamy, v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.11.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P(MD)No.20185 of 2016 S.Periyasamy ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The District Collector, Dindigul District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
3. The Tahsildar, Vedachandur Taluk, Dindigul District.
4. The Assistant Commissioner, HR & CE Department, ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the Tahsildar, the 3rd respondent herein to delete the name Soolapuram Vinayagar Kovil Maniyam Temporary Poojai Arumugapandaram in the 1914 settlement register and to include the name of the petitioner in the light of the earlier proceedings of the settlement Tahsildar in SR.No.1838/MIACT/DGL/1967 by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 27.09.2016. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Siva Thilakar For Respondents : Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthiah, Government Advocate
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed, seeking to direct the third respondent to delete the name Soolapuram Vinayagar Kovil Maniyam Temporary Poojai Arumugapandaram from the settlement register of the year 1914 and to include the name of the petitioner in the light of the proceedings of the Tahsildar.
2.Heard both side. 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 the property in Survey No.1469 originally was purchased by his father in the year 1974 and subsequently, a settlement deed dated 22.06.2006 was executed in favour the petitioner and all the revenue records stand in his name. Later on, it was learnt by the petitioner that HR & CE Department's name was reflected in the said revenue records. Hence the petitioner on 27.09.2016 sent a representation to the respondents, which followed was by a reminder dated 14.10.2016 requesting to rectify the said mistake. Since no action has been taken, the petitioner is before this Court.
4.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that the representation of the petitioner would be considered on merits 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 third respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 27.09.2016 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 other 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(Crl side) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To
1. The District Collector, Dindigul District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
3. The Tahsildar, Vedachandur Taluk, Dindigul District.
4.The Assistant Commissioner, HR & CE Department, + 1 cc TO Mr.S.Siva Thilakar , Advocate in SR No. 85862 +1cc to The Special Government Pleader in SR.No.86249 dsk AE/SV MMS/SAR2/17.11.2017/3P/7C ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.20185 of 2016 08.11.2017