P.Malaikannan v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.07.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR P.Malaikannan ...

Petitioner Vs 1 The District Collector, 2 The District Revenue Officer, 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District.

4 The Tahsildar, Tiruchuli, Virudhunagar District.

...

Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the respondent No.4 in his proceedings in Ou.Mu.A2/2034/2025,

dated 03.06.2025, and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Principles of Natural Justice and further direct the respondent No. 4 to conduct an enquiry in accordance with law.

For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Jothi Basu For Respondents : Mr.A.Baskaran, Addl. Govt. Pleader.

ORDER

The Writ Petition is filed, challenging the communication of the fourth respondent, negativing the request of the petitioner to include the names of the petitioner and his siblings in the patta for the property in Survey No.12/17D, Sethupuram Village, Tiruchuli Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

2. The petitioner submitted an application for inclusion of names in respect of the subject property. The fourth respondent, in the impugned order, has stated that though the name of petitioner's father - Ponnuchamy found place in the digital records, the Survey No.12/17D is not found in Village ''A'' Register and FMB. It is also stated that the said survey number is not available on ground. Hence, the fourth respondent rejected the request of the petitioner and also informed him by the impugned order that his recommendation for cancellation of entry in the digital records was pending before the third respondent. Challenging the very same impugned order, the

petitioner already preferred an appeal before the third respondent on 13.06.2025. Since the petitioner already filed an appeal before the third respondent challenging the impugned order passed by the fourth respondent, he is not entitled to maintain the Writ Petition before this Court. In other words, the petitioner is not entitled to prosecute two remedies simultaneously.

3. Therefore, the Writ Petition stands dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to prosecute the appeal before the third respondent in accordance with law. The third respondent shall afford reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and dispose of the appeal pending on his file in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, the connected W.M.P.(MD) No.13715 of 2025 is closed.

02.07.2025 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No dixit To:

1 The District Collector,

2 The District Revenue Officer, 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District.

4 The Tahsildar, Tiruchuli, Virudhunagar District.

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

dixit 02.07.2025