P.Muthuramalingam v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.08.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR P.Muturamalingam ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector, Madurai, Madurai District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai, Madurai District.
3.The Tahsildar, Madurai West Taluk, Madurai District.
... Respondents Prayer :- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider petitioner's representation dated 10.06.2025 within the time stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Palanisamy For R1to R3 : Mr.A.Baskaran, Addl. Government Pleader.
ORDER
The petitioner herein seeks a direction to the respondents to consider his representation dated 10.06.2025 within the time stipulated by this Court.
2.Heard the arguments of Mr.T.Palanisamy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.A.Baskaran, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. By consent of both sides, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
3.According to the petitioner, his father, Pandithurai, owned 7 cents of land in Survey No.55/14 in Kodimangalam Village, Madurai South Taluk. Out of the said extent, he sold 2 1⁄4 cents of land in favour of one Palaniyandi Ambalam on 06.07.1970. The remaining extent of
4.75 cents of land has been in possession and enjoyment of the petitioner's family. The above mentioned Palaniyandi Ambalam's legal heirs, by producing invalid documents, got the revenue records mutated in their favour in respect of the entire 7 cents, instead of 2 1⁄4 purchased by their father. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation on 10.06.2025, seeking correction of the error that had occurred during the UDR updation in the revenue records and issuance of patta in respect of the 4.75 cents of land retained by the petitioner's father. The said representation has not been considered. Hence, the petitioner has come before this Court.
4.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the the petitioner seeks correction in the UDR records. Therefore, the competent authority to consider the same is the District Revenue Officer and the said Officer has not been made as a party in this writ petition.
5.In view of the same, without expressing any opinion on the
merits of the matter, the second respondent is directed to forward a copy of the representation of the petitioner dated 10.06.2025 to the District Revenue Officer, Madurai, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The said authority shall consider the same and pass final orders on its own merits, within a further period of twelve weeks, after affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 21.08.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No cp To
1. The District Collector, Madurai, Madurai District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai, Madurai District.
3. The Tahsildar, Madurai West Taluk, Madurai District.
Copy To:
The District Revenue Officer,
Madurai.
S.SOUNTHAR ,J cp W.P.(MD)No.22829 of 2025 Dated: 21.08.2025