Madras High CourtWP(MD)/18102/2015dismissed

A. Muthukaruppan v. The District Revenue Officer

2020-02-06Honourable Mr Justice S.S. Sundar3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 06.02.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR A.Muthukaruppan .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Revenue Officer, 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, 3.The Tahsildar, Vadipatti Taluk, Vadipatti, 4.The Village Administrative Officer, 51, Vavidamaruthur Village, Vadipatti Taluk, .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to carry out appropriate changes in all the revenue records including patta No.508 issued to the petitioner by the third respondent in respect of the extent of the property mentioned as 20 cents (0.08.0 hectares) instead of the petitioner actually owned 27 cents of land out of total extent of 1 acre in S.No.103/4 Sub divided as 103/4-B, situate at No.51, Vavidamaruthur Village, 15B, Mettupatti Utkadai, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District in the light of the notice issued by the second respondent in Oo.Mu.No.5852/2014/N, dated 26.08.2014 within a stipulated time that may be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Saravanan For Respondents : Mr.C.Ramar Government Advocate

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed for issuing a Writ of Mandamus 1/3

directing the respondents herein to carry out appropriate changes in all the revenue records including patta No.508 issued to the petitioner by the third respondent by correcting the extent as 27 cents in stead of 20 cents as it exists out of the total extent of 1 acre in Survey No.103/4, now sub divided as 103/4-B in Vavidamaruthur Village, Mettupatti Utkadai, Vadipatti Taluk, 2.Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 3.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner admits that no order was passed as such by the Tahsildar but the petitioner seek correction of the revenue records as per his title documents. 4.

The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents produced before this Court a certified copy issued by the Village Administrative Officer to the effect that the land in Survey No.103/4-B measuring an extent of 0.08.0 hectare equivalent to 20 cents has been included in Survey No.103/4A by mistake and that the said land is in the enjoyment of the petitioner. Though the authority of Village Administrative Officer to give the certificate is doubtful, this Court is of the view that the Village Administrative Officer himself has submitted that the mistake was during UDR and that therefore, the petitioner should be directed to approach the District Revenue Officer.

In the said circumstances, giving liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal or petition before the District Revenue Officer, to modify the revenue records based on previous records before UDR, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AD II) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) SRM To 1.The District Revenue Officer, 2/3

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, 3.The Tahsildar, Vadipatti Taluk, Vadipatti, 4.The Village Administrative Officer, 51, Vavidamaruthur Village, Vadipatti Taluk, +1 CC to MR.A.SARAVANAN, Advocate ( SR-5008[F] dated 06/02/2020 ) +1 CC to SPL GP ( SR-5221[F] dated 07/02/2020 ) ORDER MADE IN 06.02.2020 KM/(18.02.2020) 3P 7C 3/3