B.Senthilkumar v. The District Registrar(Registration)
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.10.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR B.Senthilkumar ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Registrar(Registration), Collectorate, Dindigul District.
2.The Sub Registrar, Athur Sub Registrar Office, Athur, Dindigul District.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District.
4.The Inspector of Police, Sempatti Police Station, Dindigul District.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to register the sale deed executed by the petitioner in favour of Mottaiyandi in respect of property in S.No.523 of Bodikkamanvadi Village, Dindigul District within stipulated time fixed by this Court and direct the respondents 3 and 4 to adequate necessary police protection to register the sale deed by considering the the petitioner's representation dated 24.09.2019 within stipulated time as fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Manimaran For Respondents : Mr.M.Murugan Government Advocate
ORDER
Mr.R.Manimaran, learned counsel on record for writ petitioner is before this Court.
2. Mr.M.Murugan, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of respondents.
3. With consent of learned counsel on both sides, main writ petition is taken up, heard out and is being disposed of. 1/3
4. Instant main writ petition turns on a very narrow compass, as it is one seeking mandamus qua disposal of writ petitioner's representation dated 24.09.2019 wherein writ petitioner has sought registration of a document.
5. Notwithstanding several averments/ grounds raised / contentions urged in the affidavit filed in support of instant writ petition, learned counsel for writ petitioner abridges the scope of the writ petition / prayer in instant writ petition and submits that it will suffice if the second respondent is directed to dispose of the aforementioned representation of the writ petitioner, dated 24.09.2019, details of which have been alluded to supra.
6. Learned State counsel submitted that the second respondent is the authority who shall consider the aforementioned representation dated 24.09.2019 made by the writ petitioner (page Nos.30 and 31 of the typed set of papers forming part of the case file).
7. The aforesaid representation dated 24.09.2019 shall be disposed of by the second respondent on its own merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and in any event, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. It is made clear that in the course of the representation being considered by the second respondent, if the rights of any other third party / parties or any other third party entity / entities is / are likely to be affected, the second respondent shall put on notice and give reasonable opportunity to such third party / parties or any other third party entity / entities, before disposing of the aforementioned writ petitioner's representation. Though obvious, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion or view on the merits of the matter.
9. The proceeding / order of disposal of aforementioned representation shall be communicated by the office of the second respondent to the writ petitioner under due acknowledgement within seven (7) working days from the completion of aforesaid exercise, ie., seven days from date of disposal.
10. Instant Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar 2/3
SSL To 1.The District Registrar(Registration), Collectorate, Dindigul District.
2.The Sub Registrar, Athur Sub Registrar Office, Athur, Dindigul District.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District.
4.The Inspector of Police, Sempatti Police Station, Dindigul District.
+1 CC to M/s.R. MANIMARAN, Advocate ( SR-91845[F] dated 15/10/2019 ) +1 CC to M/s.GP ( SR-91895[F] dated 15/10/2019 ) 14.10.2019 JM/17.10.2019/3P/7C 3/3