G.Chellammal, W/O.Gurusamy v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.06.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN 1.G.Chellammal 2.C.Chinaponnu ... Petitioners /vs./ 1.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Collectorate, District Collector Office, Dindigul.

2.The District Revenue Officer, Dindigul Region, Dindigul District, Collectorate Campus, Dindigul.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Pazhani Division, RDO Office Campus, Pazhani.

4.The Tahsildar, Vedasanthoor Taluk, Vedasanthoor Taluk Office, Dindigul District. 1/5

5.A.Amutha 6.Gandhi 7.Pazhanisamy 8.The Sub Registrar, Vedamadurai Sub Registrar Office, Vadamadurai, Vedasanthoor Taluk, Dindigul District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents No.1 to 4 to take appropriate action against the respondents No.5 to 7 on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated on 28.02.2018. For Petitioners : No appearance For R1 to R4 : Mr.S.P.Maharajan Special Government Pleader For R6 to R8 : No appearance

ORDER

There is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. 2.The petitioners are in litigation with the private respondents herein, namely the respondents 5 to 7 in O.S.No.45 of 2018 before the District Court, Dindigul. It appears that the land in question belongs to all the parties and 2/5

therefore, the petitioners are seeking for partition of the property. However, during the pendency of the suit, the private respondents, respondents 5 to 7, appear to be quarrying the land and are making bricks and thereby, devaluing the rights of the petitioners in the aforesaid land. Hence, the petitioners have given a representation to the first respondent on 28.02.2018 and further representation on 05.03.2018.

3.It is the further case of the petitioners that there is a forgery committed by the petitioners' siblings by executing a sale deed in favour of the fifth respondent by one of the legal heir of late.Chinnasamy. The status of the case is not known, as the counsel for the Department is unable to confirm the position. There is also no representation on behalf of the petitioners. 4.Considering the age factor of the petitioners and considering the fact that the petitioners appear to be semiliterate persons, I direct the first respondent to enquire into the complaint of the petitioners dated 28.02.2018 and 05.03.2018, call upon the petitioners and take a suitable action, if any action can be taken on the aforesaid representation of the petitioners. 3/5

5.The Writ Petition stands disposed of, accordingly. No costs. Index : Yes / No 07.06.2024 Internet : Yes / No mm To 1.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Collectorate, District Collector Office, Dindigul.

2.The District Revenue Officer, Dindigul Region, Dindigul District, Collectorate Campus, Dindigul.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Pazhani Division, RDO Office Campus, Pazhani.

4.The Tahsildar, Vedasanthoor Taluk, Vedasanthoor Taluk Office, Dindigul District. 4/5

C.SARAVANAN, J.

mm 07.06.2024 5/5