Albonse v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 03.07.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR Albonse ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram Division, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Tahsildar, Thiruvadanai Taluka, Ramanathapuram District.

4.The Head Surveyor, Thiruvadanai Taluka, Ramanathapuram District.

5.Vedhammal ... Respondents Prayer :- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing respondents to consider the objection petition dated 17.06.2025 with regard to survey the land at Survey No.513/27 and 513/28, Mangalkakudi Revenue

Village, Thiruvadanai Taluka, consequently directing the respondents to rectify the error in Patta and FMB Sketch at Survey No.513/27 and 513/28, Mangalkakudi Revenue Village, Thiruvadanai Taluka. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Mahendrarajan For R1 to R4 : Mr.A.Baskaran Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondent to consider his objection petition dated 17.06.2025, objecting to survey of Survey No.513/28, belongs to the fifth respondent.

2. When the writ petition is taken up for hearing, learned Additional Government Pleader, who takes notice for respondents 1 to 4 on instructions would submit that as per the application submitted by the fifth respondent for survey of her property situated in S.No.513/28, notice was issued to neighbouring land owners including the petitioner and survey was conducted on 02.07.2025. It is further stated by the learned Additional Government Pleader that the petitioner's objection was also considered and he was advised to approach the second respondent for rectification of extent in the revenue records.

3. The main objection of the petitioner is that she purchased 2,500 sq.ft of land in Survey No.513/27, however in the patta issued to her, the extent is wrongly mentioned as 0.0.65 ares. Since there is a discrepancy in the extent between the revenue records and her title deeds, she objected to survey the property of the fifth respondent which lies in Survey No.513/27.

4. If the extent of the property mentioned in the revenue records and the FMB are not in accordance with the title deeds, it is for the petitioner to move the second respondent seeking rectification of revenue records. As per the submissions of the learned Additional Government Pleader, survey has been already completed. In view of the same, no further orders are required in this writ petition.

5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 03.07.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No pnn

S. SOUNTHAR , J.

pnn To 1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram Division, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Tahsildar, Thiruvadanai Taluka, Ramanathapuram District.

4.The Head Surveyor, Thiruvadanai Taluka, Ramanathapuram District.

Dated: 03.07.2025