Madras High CourtWMP(MD)/16253/2022disposed of

M.C.An. Annamalai @ Mani, v. Chidambaram .An

2022-09-19Honourable Mr Justice G.R.Swaminathan2 pages

WMP(MD) No.16253 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Special Original Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Nineteenth day of September Two Thousand and Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN WMP(MD) No.16253 of 2022 in Rev.Aplw(MD)SR.No.53386 of 2022 M.C.AN.ANNAMALAI @ MANI ... PETITIONER/PETITIONER/ 3rd PARTY Vs

1. AN.CHIDAMBARAM ... RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/ PETITIONER

2. THE THASILDAR, THIRUMAYAM TALUK, PUDUKOTTAI DISTRICT.

... RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT Petition filed praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court may be pleased to grant leave to petitioner to file review against the order passed by this Hon'ble Court in WP(MD).No.9000 of 2022 dated 13.06.2022. Prayer in Rev.Aplw(MD)SR.No.53386 of 2022 :

Pleased to review the order dated 13.06.2022 made in WP(MD) No.9000/2022 by allowing this Review Petition or pass such further or other suitable orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in circumstances of the case.

Prayer in WP(MD). 9000/ 2022 :

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to sub-divide and grant patta to the petitioner for his property in S.No. 1260/2 based on the petitioner's representation dated 07.03.2022 within the period that may be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.

ORDER : This petition coming up for orders on this day, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.ARUN SWAMINATHAN.RM, Advocate for the petitioner, the court made the following order:- https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2

WMP(MD) No.16253 of 2022 There is no need to review the order passed on 13.06.2022 made in W.P.(MD)No.9000 of 2022. By the said order, the Tahsildar, Thirumayam had only been directed to enquire into the petitioner's representation and take appropriate steps and pass final order. 2.I have not given any positive direction that patta should be issued in favour of the writ petitioner. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that he is also having a stake in the matter and without reference to the same, the order had been obtained behind his back. If that be so, the Tahsildar, Thirumayam is directed to hear the petitioner herein and the other stakeholders and only thereafter, pass final order. The period of twelve weeks set out in the order dated 13.06.2022 shall stand extended by eight more weeks.

3. This Petition is disposed of accordingly. I make it clear that I have not gone into the merits of the matter. The contentions of all the stakeholders are left open. It is open to the jurisdictional Tahsildar to pass order one way or other. sd/- 19/09/2022 / TRUE COPY / 20/09/2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO THE THASILDAR THIRUMAYAM TALUK, PUDUKOTTAI DISTRICT.

+1. C.C. to M/S. ARUN SWAMINATHAN.RM Advocate SR.No.45714 (F). ORDER IN WMP(MD) No.16253 of 2022 in Rev.Aplw(MD)SR.No.53386 of 2022 Date :19/09/2022 RMI USK/SBN/SAR-II/20.09.2022/2P/3C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2