A.Murugesan v. The Revenue Divisional Officer,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :05.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDER and WMP (MD) Nos.13739 and 13740, 18701 and 18702 of 2025 A.Murugesan ... Petitioner(s) in W.P.(MD)No.17945 of 2025 Vs.

Office of the Revenue Divisional Office,

3. A.Solaiappan ... Respondent(s) PRAYER in W.P.(MD)No.17945 of 2025: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records pertaining to the impugned order in NE.Mu.2920/2022/A5 dated 10.06.2025 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents no.1 and 2 to restore petitioner name in the patta for the land in S.F.Nos.596/5B, 596/4H, 596/6B situated in Ponnamaravathi East Village, Ponnamaravathi Taluk, Pudukottai District. 1/6

M.Chitra ... Petitioner(s) in W.P.(MD)No.23794 of 2025 Vs.

Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer,

3. Solaiappan ... Respondent(s) PRAYER in W.P.(MD)No.23794 of 2025: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records pertaining to the impugned order in Ne.Mu. 2920/2022/A5 dated 10.06.2025 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents No.1 and 2 to restore the patta for the land in SF No.596/5D and SF No.596/3 situated in Ponnamaravathi East Village, Ponnamaravathi Taluk, Pudukottai District to its earlier position within the period.

For Petitioner :Mr.C.Arulvadivel @ Sekar for M/s.C.Arulvadivel Associates (in both WP) For Respondents :Mr.D.Sadiq Raja Addl. Government Pleader for R1 & R2 Mr.M.Mahaboob Fazil for R3 (in both WP) 2/6

COMMON ORDER These writ petitions have been filed challenging the impugned proceedings dated 10.06.2025 passed by the first respondent.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

3. The only ground raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners were not put on notice before the impugned proceedings were passed.

4. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 fairly concedes that there is no specific averment in the impugned proceedings to indicate that notice was served on the petitioners.

5. Since the petitioners had not been put on notice before the impugned orders were passed, the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remanded to the first respondent for fresh consideration. The first respondent shall issue notice to all concerned parties and after 3/6

affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties, pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law.

6. With the above observation and directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs. (K.SURENDER, J) 05.02.2026 NCC :Yes/No Internet :Yes/No Index :Yes/No PKN 4/6

To Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, 5/6

K.SURENDER, J.

PKN 05.02.2026 6/6