S.Raju v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.10.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR S.Raju ... Petitioner /Vs./ 1.The District Collector, Collectorate Campus, Madurai-20.
2.The Tahsildar, Madurai South, Thirupparankundram, Madurai District.
3.The Tahsildar, Madurai West, Virattipathu, Madurai District.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to issue patta in favour of the petitioner in respect of the property comprised in Town Survey No.19/2A1 with an extent of 6055 sq.meter situates in Ponmeni Village, Block No.54, Madurai Town by considering the petitioner's representation dated 24.05.2018 within a time as stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ponraj for Mr.P.Gunasekaran For Respondents : Mr.Aayiram K.Selvakumar Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
Mr.S.Ponraj, learned counsel on record for writ petitioner is before this Court.
1/3
2. Mr.Aayiram K.Selvakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepts notice on behalf all three respondents.
3. With consent of learned counsel on both sides, main writ petition is taken up, heard out and is being disposed of.
4. The main writ petition turns on a very narrow compass, as it is one seeking mandamus qua disposal of writ petitioner's representation dated 25.04.2018 (this Court is informed that it is wrongly mentioned as 24.05.2018 in the writ prayer and it is wrongly mentioned as 26.04.2018 in 03.05.2018 communication from District Collector to jurisdictional Tahsildar) wherein writ petitioner has made a plea for patta qua an extent of land mentioned in the representation.
5. Notwithstanding several averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, notwithstanding several 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 and submits that it will suffice if the third respondent is directed to dispose of the aforementioned representation of the writ petitioner, dated 25.04.2018, details of which have been alluded to supra.
6. Learned State counsel submitted that the third respondent is the authority who shall consider the aforementioned representation dated 25.04.2018 made by the writ petitioner (page Nos.9 and 10 of the typed set of papers forming part of the case file).
7. The aforesaid representation dated 25.04.2018 shall be disposed of by the third 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 third respondent, if the rights of any other third party / parties or any other third party entity / entities is / are likely to be affected, the third respondent shall 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 shall be communicated by the office of the third respondent to the writ petitioner under due acknowledgement within seven (7) working days from the completion of aforesaid exercise.
2/3
10. Instant Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) rmk To 1.The District Collector, Collectorate Campus, Madurai-20.
2.The Tahsildar, Madurai South, Thirupparankundram, Madurai District.
3.The Tahsildar, Madurai West, Virattipathu, Madurai District.
+1 CC to M/s.P.GUNASEKARAN, Advocate ( SR-93890[F] dated 23/10/2019 ) +1 CC to M/s.GP ( SR-94060[F] dated 23/10/2019 ) Order made in Dated: 22.10.2019 VB(05.11.2019) 3P : 6C 3/3