Pandiyarajan.P.M v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY & W.M.P.(MD)Nos.15312 & 15314 of 2023 Pandiyarajan.P.M S/o.Late.Mahamuni 155, North Street Karuppayurani, Madurai District ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector Madurai Collectorate Campus, Madurai District

2. The District Revenue Officer Madurai Collectorate Campus, Madurai ... Respondents Prayer:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to implead the petitioner as the respondent as the necessary party in the proceedings in Na.Ka.no. R1/42789/2015 and permit the petitioner to raise the objections.

1/6

For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Senthil Kumar For Respondent : Mrs.K.Malathi, AGP

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to implead the petitioner as the respondent as the necessary party in the proceedings in Na.Ka.no. R1/42789/2015 and permit the petitioner to raise the objections.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in this case, an extent of 16.37 Acres of land, including the subject land, was acquired by the Government of Tamil Nadu under the Land Ceiling Act on 19.01.1985. Out of the said lands, the subject land was re-allotted to one Vasanthi on 17.06.2002. Thereafter, by suppressing the aforesaid aspect, the legal heirs of said Vasanthi had entered into a sale agreement with the petitioner. Under these circumstances, the petitioner came to know that the Commissioner of Land Reforms had directed the 2nd respondent to conduct a detailed enquiry as if re-allottees of the lands are eligible for allotment or not. The petitioner had also made an attempt to 2/6

participate in the said enquiry, however, he was not permitted to enter into the enquiry hall without filing the implead petition. Therefore, he approached the 2nd respondent on 24.07.2023 to file an impleading petition. However, the 2nd respondent had refused to accept the same. Hence, this petition.

3. In reply, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent had confirmed the submissions made by the petitioner and hence, he requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent and also perused the entire materials available on record.

5. In the case on hand, in this case, initially, the subject land was acquired by the Government of Tamil Nadu under the Land Ceiling Act and it was re-allotted to one Vasanthi. By suppressing the aforesaid aspect, the legal heirs of said Vasanthi had entered into sale agreement with the petitioner. Under these circumstances, the petitioner came to 3/6

know that the Commissioner of Land Reforms had directed the 2nd respondent to conduct a detailed enquiry as if re-allottees of the lands are eligible for allotment or not. The petitioner had also made an attempt to participate in the said enquiry, however, he was not permitted to enter into the enquiry hall without filing the implead petition. Therefore, he approached the 2nd respondent on 24.07.2023 to file an impleading petition. However, the 2nd respondent had refused to accept the same.

6. In view of the above, this Court directs the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's impleading application dated 24.07.2023 and pass orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No cost. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.

08.01.2026 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No nsa 4/6

To

1. The District Collector Madurai Collectorate Campus, Madurai District

2. The District Revenue Officer Madurai Collectorate Campus, Madurai 5/6

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J., nsa & W.M.P.(MD)Nos.15312 & 15314 of 2023 08.01.2026 6/6