← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/18544/2019disposed of

D.Padmanaban v. The Tahsildar

2019-08-28Honourable Mr Justice R. Suresh Kumar2 pages

W.P.(MD)No.18544 of 2019 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 28.08.2019

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR W.P.(MD)No.18544 of 2019 D.Padmanaban ... Petitioner -Vs1.The Tahsildar, Trichy West, Thasildhar Office, Trichy District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Trichy District.

3.G.Balasubramaniyam ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition - filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus, to direct the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 29.07.2019 and to cancel the patta issued by the 1st respondent in favour of the 3rd respondent, the property in Survey No.1175, South Vandikkaratheru, Woraiyur, Trichy District.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Ramesh For Respondents : Mr.P.Kannithevan, AGP.

For RR1 and 2

ORDER

The prayer in this writ petition is for a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 29.07.2019 and to cancel the patta issued by the 1st respondent in favour of the 3rd respondent, the property in Survey No.1175, South Vandikkaratheru, Woraiyur, Trichy District. 2.Heard Mr.A.Ramesh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.Kannithevan, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2. Since no adverse order is going to be passed against the 3rd respondent, notice to him is dispensed with.

3.In respect of the house plot property in S.No.1175, at South Vandikkaratheru, Woraiyur, Trichy District, it seems that patta has been issued in respect of the 3rd respondent, even though, according to the petitioner, the property belongs to the petitioner. Therefore, to cancel the said patta, the petitioner had given an appeal to the 2nd respondent on 29.07.2019 and the same is still https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

W.P.(MD)No.18544 of 2019 pending with the 2nd respondent. Therefore, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, if the said appeal is decided by the 2nd respondent, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be stipulated by this Court, the petitioner would be satisfied.

4.I have heard the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents, who would submit that, the said appeal filed by the petitioner and pending before the 2nd respondent would be decided on merits, within a time frame, after hearing both parties.

5.Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for herein, this Court is inclined to dispose of this writ petition, with the consent of both the parties, at the stage of admission itself, with the following direction:

"The 2nd respondent is hereby directed to consider the appeal/representation dated 29.07.2019 filed by the petitioner, on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent by sending them separate notices and pass final orders thereon, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order."

6.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AD-I) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) Arul To 1.The Tahsildar, Trichy West, Thasildhar Office, Trichy District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Trichy District.

+1 CC to SPL GP ( SR-84537[F] dated 30/08/2019 ) Order made in W.P.(MD)No.18544 of 2019 28.08.2019 VB(19.12.2019) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2