R.Muralidharan v. The District Revenue Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :09.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY and WMP (MD) Nos.19125, 19126 & 19128 of 2025

1. R.Muralidharan

2. R.Kannan ... Petitioners Vs.

1. The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Collectorate Campus, Virudhunagar,

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Office, Sivakasi,

3. The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar,

4. The Executive Officer, Settiyarpatti Town Panchayat, ... Respondents 1/6

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent vide his proceedings in Na.Ka.Aa4/R.T.R.-484/2023 dated 01.07.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the respondents to mutate the patta in the name of the petitioners in old survey No.324/1 and New survey Nos.467/15 and 16 situated at Kommandhapuram, Settiyarpatti Village, Rajapalayam Taluk, Virudhunagar District within the time that may be stipulated by this Honourable Court. For Petitioners :Mr.H.Mohammed Imran for M/s Ajmal Associates For Respondents :Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman Government Advocate for R1 to R3 Mr.S.Saji Bino Special Government Pleader for R4

O R D E R

An order dated 01.07.2025 of the jurisdictional Tahsildar is assailed in this writ petition on the grounds that the Tahsildar did not independently apply his mind and accepted the objections of the Executive Officer of Chettiarpatti Town Panchayat. 2/6

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners invited my attention to the impugned order and pointed out that the objections of the Executive Officer were not provided to the petitioners and, consequently, the petitioners were deprived of an opportunity to respond to such objections. Since the order is passed entirely on the basis of such objections, he submits that reconsideration is warranted.

3. Learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.S.Saji Bino, learned Special Government Pleader, accepts notice for the fourth respondent. Learned Government Advocate submits that the reasons for rejection are recorded in the penultimate paragraph of the impugned order. He also relies upon written instructions received by him from the Tahsildar.

4. On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that the said order was issued by accepting the objections of the Executive Officer, Chettiarpatti Town Panchayat, in entirety. In view of the assertion that such objections were not provided to the petitioners and that the petitioners were deprived of an opportunity to respond thereto, reconsideration is necessary.

3/6

5. Accordingly, impugned order dated 01.07.2025 is set aside and the matter is remanded for reconsideration by the third respondent. After providing the petitioners a copy of the objections raised by the Executive Officer, Chettiarpatti Town Panchayat and an opportunity to respond thereto, a reasoned order shall be issued within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

09.09.2025 NCC :No Internet :Yes Index :No PKN To

1. The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Collectorate Campus, Virudhunagar,

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Office, Sivakasi,

3. The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, 4/6

4. The Executive Officer, Settiyarpatti Town Panchayat, 5/6

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

PKN 09.09.2025 1/2 6/6