Madras High CourtWP(MD)/23535/2016disposed of

Renkasamy v. The District Collector

2016-12-02Honourable Mr Justice V. Bharathidasan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.12.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN Writ Petition(MD)No.23535 of 2016 Renkasamy ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

3. The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Karambakudi, Pudukkottai District.

4.Lakshmanan ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to cancel the Patta No.549, Survey No.331 (24E) situated at Poonaviduthi, Karambakudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District by wrongly classified as a Natham Poramboke land and issued patta in the name of the fourth respondent consequently direct the respondents to reinstate of the name of the petitioner's father in patta by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 24.10.2016 within a time frame stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioners : Mr.E.Balasubramanian For Respondents : Mr.R.Anandharaj Government Advocate

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 3. 2.Since no adverse order is going to be passed against the fourth respondent, notice to the fourth respondent is dispensed with.

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

3.According to the petitioner, he is the owner of the property to an extent of 5 cents in Ponnanviduthi, Karambakudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District and he is in possession and enjoyment of the property. Now, he came to know that out of 5 cents 1-1/2 cents of land has been re-classified as Natham Poramboke and issued patta in favour of the fourth respondent. In the above circumstances, he made a representation to the respondents 1 to 3 to cancel the reclassification and issue a patta in favour of the petitioner. So far no order has been passed by the respondents 1 to 3, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.

4.The learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the second respondent is the competent authority to pass orders.

5.In the above circumstances, the second respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's application, dated 24.10.2016 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after issuing notice to the petitioner as well as to the fourth respondent, within a period of twelve 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(RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

3. The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Karambakudi, Pudukkottai District.

+ 1 CC TO SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER IN SR No. 79538 + 1 CC TO Mr.E.BALASUBRAMANIAN, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 78590 PS TE/SS-2 : 20/12/2016 : 2P/6C W.P(MD)No.23535 of 2016 02.12.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/