← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/19968/2025disposed of

N.Sathakathulla v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

2025-07-23Honourable Mr Justice S. Sounthar6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR W.P.(MD)No.19968 of 2025 N.Sathakathulla ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani, Dindigul District, Pin - 624 601.

2. The Tahsildar, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District, Pin - 624 601.

... 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 re-consider petitioner's online patta application 2025/0105/13/470544, dated 18.03.2025 towards Survey No.1129 (extent of 10 cents) having Patta No.853 situated at Palani, Dindigul district on the basis of the direction of the 1st respondent dated 02.07.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Suriyamuthu For Respondent : Mr.M.Gangatharan, Govt. Advocate.

1/6

O R D E R

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a direction to the second respondent to consider his online application 2025/0105/13/470544, dated 18.03.2025 seeking issuance of patta in respect of 10 cents of land in S.No.1129.

2. Heard the arguments of Mr.N.Suriyamuthu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Gangatharan, learned Government Advocate, who takes notice for the respondents. By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. The petitioner claims right over the subject property under oral HIBA declared by his father Tagoor Meeran. The petitioner applied for mutation of revenue records in his favour by producing the HIBA confirmation deed executed by his father. The application of the petitioner was rejected by the second respondent on the ground that he failed to furnish any registered document. Challenging the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the first respondent on 2/6

17.06.2025. The first respondent by his proceedings in Na.Ka.No. 05/2023/A1, dated 02.07.2025, directed the second respondent to reconsider the request made by the petitioner.

4. The second respondent rejected the application submitted by the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner failed to produce any registered document in support of his request for patta transfer. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent. Instead of considering the appeal on merits, the first respondent erroneously directed the second respondent to reconsider the issue. If the request for patta is rejected by the second respondent under Section 12 of the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act, 1983, an appeal will lie before the first respondent. The petitioner rightly filed an appeal by invoking Section 12 of the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act, 1983 and hence, the first respondent ought to have considered the application filed by the petitioner on its own merits.

Therefore, this Court directs the first respondent to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner dated 17.06.

Tagoor Meeran and other co-pattathars mentioned in patta No.853.

5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

23.07.2025 vsm Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No 4/6

To

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani, Dindigul District, Pin - 624 601.

2. The Tahsildar, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District, Pin - 624 601.

5/6

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

vsm W.P (MD) No.19968 of 2025 23.07.2025 6/6