Madras High CourtWA(MD)/2174/2025dismissed

R.Karuppasamy v. Nirmala

2026-04-08Honourable Mr Justice N. Sathish Kumar,Honourable Mr.Justice M.Jothiraman4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.04.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN C.M.P.(MD)No.12435 of 2025 R.Karuppasamy ... Appellant Vs.

1.Nirmala

2. The District Revenue Officer, Thoothukudi - 628 101, Thoothukudi District.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovilpatti - 628 501, Thoothukudi District.

4. The Tahsildar, Kayathar Taluk, Kayathar - 628 952, Thoothukudi District.

.... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Appeal - filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.7714 of 2025, dated 21.03.2025.

1/4

For Appellant : Mr.A.V.Arun For Respondents : Mr.R.Murali for R1 Mr.A.Kannan, Addl. Govt. Pleader for R2 to R4

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.) The present Writ Appeal has been filed challenging the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No. 7714 of 2025, dated 21.03.2025.

2. The first respondent had filed the said Writ Petition challenging the order of the second respondent dated 18.02.2025, by which the appeal preferred by the first respondent was rejected on the ground of limitation. The learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties, condoned the delay and granted liberty to the first respondent to file a revision before the District Revenue Officer against the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer. The learned Single Judge further directed the second respondent to dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has preferred the present Writ Appeal.

2/4

3. We have perused the entire materials available on record.

4. The learned Single Judge, taking note of the fact that there is no provision to condone the delay in entertaining the revision, proceeded to condone the delay and permitted the writ petitioner to file a revision before the appropriate authority.

5. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that, once the learned Single Judge has directed the parties to agitate their rights before the District Revenue Officer, where admittedly, the appellant will also have an opportunity of being heard, we find no merit in this Writ Appeal.

6. Accordingly, this Writ Appeal is dismissed. The District Revenue Officer is directed to dispose of the revision filed by the first respondent, within the time stipulated by the Writ court. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

[N.S.K., J.] & [M.J.R., J.] vsm 08.04.2026 Index : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No 3/4

N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.

AND M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

vsm To

1. The District Revenue Officer, Thoothukudi - 628 101, Thoothukudi District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovilpatti - 628 501, Thoothukudi District.

3. The Tahsildar, Kayathar Taluk, Kayathar - 628 952, Thoothukudi District.

08.04.2026 4/4