Manikandan .P v. The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :14.11.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY P.Manikandan ... Petitioner Vs The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Karaikudi.

... Respondent PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the respondent dated 29.12.2021 in respect of online patta transfer application of petitioner I ID No.2021/0103/23/129017, quash the same and consequently, direct the respondent herein to issue patta for the petitioner in respect of patta lands vide Patta No.112, comprised in Survey Nos. 170/1, 2, 3, 4, 171/1, 171/2, 171/4, 171/5, 171/6, 171/7 and also the properties in Patta No.416 comprised in Survey Nos.149/4, 149/5, 332/3, 332/4 and 149/3B situated in K.Nerpugapatti Village, Sakottai Union, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai as per the sale certificate No.080/1/2012-13 dated 15.10.2012 issued by the Chief Manager, Salem Main Branch, Indian Overseas Bank and possession Memo issued by the Official Liquidator, High Court of Madras dated 19.04.2013 for handing over of physical possession of the petitioner within a reasonable time. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan 1/4

For Respondent : Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman Government Advocate

O R D E R

An order dated 29.12.2021 is challenged on the ground that such order is unreasoned and that an inquiry was not conducted in contravention of Rule 4(7) of the Tamil Nadu Patta Passbook Rules.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner purchased the relevant property pursuant to an auction sale under the provisions of the SARFEASI Act. He also states that a sale certificate was executed in favour of the petitioner and that possession was handed over under Possession Memo dated 19.04.2013. In these circumstances, learned counsel submits that the request for patta was rejected by the impugned unreasoned order.

3. Learned Government Advocate submits that the matter may be remanded for reconsideration.

2/4

4. On perusal of the impugned order, it is recorded therein that " Application 2021/0103/23/129017 is rejected by Zonal Deputy Tahsildar on 29-12-2021". No reasons for such rejection are discernible from the order. Being an unreasoned order, the order cannot be sustained and is hereby set aside. As a corollary, the matter is remanded for reconsideration. Upon providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, a speaking order shall be issued within three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. NCS : Yes/No 14.11.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd To The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Karaikudi.

3/4

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY.,J.

apd ORDER MADE IN 14.11.2025 4/4