S. Ramanathan, v. The District Revenue Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 20.09.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2014 S.Ramanathan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

4.K.Rajammal ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the order passed by the 1st respondent in Pa.Mu.No.26389/2012 (B6) dated 09.04.2014, reversing the order passed by the 2nd respondent 1/6

in Mu.Mu.No.A6/3549/2011 dated 03.05.2012 and to quash the order of the 1st respondent and further direct the respondent to issue patta in the name of the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.R.Laxman For Respondents : Mr.M.Siddharthan, Addl. Government Pleader for R1 to R3.

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents 1 to 3. This writ petition had been dismissed for default as against the fourth respondent. 2.Since the writ petition has not been restored as against the fourth respondent, the writ petition may have to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary party.

3.It is seen that the petitioner had succeeded before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram. Questioning the order dated 03.05.2012 passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram, 2/6

the fourth respondent had filed revision before the District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram. The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram on 09.04.2014 set aside the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram and directed that mutation in the revenue record will be made based on the outcome of O.S.No.37 of 2011 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Ramanathapuram. It is this order that is challenged in this writ petition.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner states that O.S.No.37 of 2011 was dismissed on 15.03.2017. O.S.No.108 of 2012 filed by Thirumeninathan was dismissed on 18.03.2021. The petitioner figured as the first defendant in both the suits. The impugned order states that based on the outcome of the civil suits, changes will have to be made. 5.The petitioner is permitted to submit an application before the third respondent for effecting mutation in the revenue record based on the outcome of the civil suits as directed in the impugned order. The third respondent will issue notice to the concerned parties and pass an appropriate order. This exercise shall be completed by the third 3/6

respondent within a period of ten weeks from the date of receipt of application from the writ petitioner.

6.This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 20.09.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias To:- 1.The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

4/6

5/6

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

ias 20.09.2023 6/6