Madras High CourtWP(MD)/20542/2025disposed of

N.Subbulakshmi v. The District Collector

2025-10-14Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy6 pages

W.P.(MD) No.20542 of 2025 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY.,J The matter is listed today upon being mentioned by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a typographical error in page No.4 of the order dated 14.10.2025 and that the correct survey number is 690/3C and not 390/3C.

Upon examining the records, the contention is liable to be accepted.

2. Therefore, Registry is directed to reissue the order after correcting the survey number in page No.4 thereof as 690/3C instead of 390/3C.

23.10.2025 apd 1/6

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :14.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY W.P.(MD)No.20542 of 2025 and WMP (MD) Nos.15905 & 15906 of 2025 N.Subbulakshmi ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Madurai District.

2. The District Revenue Officer, Madurai District, Madurai.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur Division, Melur, Madurai District.

4. The Tahsildar, Melur Taluk, Melur, Madurai District.

5. The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 600 028.

6. The Sub-Registrar, Melur, Madurai District.

2/6

7. Sasikala

8. Susila

9. Narmadha

10. A.Rani

11. Nagalakshmi

12. Karthiyayini ... Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in Ni.Mu.No. E-1987512/2024/G5 dated 24.01.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to restore the petitioners name in her patta bearing patta Patta No. 2097 in S.No. 690/3C comprising 90 cents situated at Melur Therku Theru, Melur, Madurai District. For Petitioner :Ms.B.Deepa For Respondents :Mr.B.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R6

O R D E R

An order dated 24.01.2025 of the District Revenue Officer is challenged in this writ petition primarily on the ground that notice was not issued to the petitioner. 3/6

2. In spite of service of notice and the names of respondents 7 to 12 being printed in the cause-list, the said respondents have not entered appearance.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited by attention to the impugned order and pointed out that such order records that the petitioner, who was arrayed as the tenth respondent therein, did not appear in the proceedings. She also points out that the order was sent to the petitioner at an address in Thillai Nagar, Chennai and that the petitioner does not reside at the said address.

4. Learned Additional Government Pleader submits, upon verification of records, that the notice in relation to the inquiry was also issued to the said Thillai Nagar, Chennai - 92 address.

5. The petitioner has stated that she has been residing in the address specified in the cause-title for about 11 years. The impugned order pertains to several survey numbers. The petitioner asserts title and rights only in respect of Survey No.690/3C. In view of violation of principles of natural justice, the impugned order cannot be sustained insofar as it deals with land in Survey No.390/3C. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside to that extent and the matter is remanded for reconsideration by the District Revenue Officer. After issuing notice to the petitioner and the other parties, a fresh order shall be issued within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No 4/6

costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 14.10.2025 NCC :No Internet :Yes Index :No PKN To