Madras High CourtWP(MD)/14663/2016disposed of

D.Selvaraj, S/O. Duraisamy v. The District Revenue Officer

2023-03-29Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :29.03.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY and W.M.P(MD).Nos.10883 and 10884 of 2016 D.Selvaraj ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Revenue Officer, Madurai District.

2.The Tahsildar, Thirumangalam Taluk, Thirumangalam, Madurai District.

3.V.Ramasamy 4.Chandra ... Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records in pursuant to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.18929/2015/G5 dated 16.02.2016 and quash the same as illegal.

For Petitioner :Mr.S.Madhavan For Respondents :Mrs.D.Farjana Ghoushia Special Government Pleader for R1 and R2 No-appearance for R3 and R4

O R D E R

The petitioner assails an order dated 16.02.2016 of the District Revenue Officer, Madurai. The said order is assailed on the ground that the petitioner was not put on notice, although the petitioner is the owner of 56 cents in Survey No.278/4B and 43 cents in Survey No.278/4D.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the sale deed dated 21.06.1996 and sale deed dated 12.04.2013 in this regard. He also relies upon the pattas issued in the name of the petitioner both in respect of Survey Nos.278/4B and 278/4D.

3. On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that V.Ramasamy and Chandra were put on notice as petitioners and Ramasamy Gounder, as the counter party before the District Revenue Officer.

4. Since the petitioner was not put on notice and provided a reasonable opportunity, the impugned order is liable to be quashed on this ground. Consequently, the impugned order dated 16.02.2016 is quashed and the matter is remitted for re-consideration by the District Revenue Officer. The District Revenue Officer shall provide a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, respondents 3 and 4 herein and any other interested person before deciding the matter.

5. Accordingly, W.P(MD).No.14663 of 2016 is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected W.M.P(MD).Nos.10883 and 10884 of 2016 are closed. 29.03.2023 NCC :No Internet :Yes Index :No ssb

To 1.The District Revenue Officer, Madurai District.

2.The Tahsildar, Thirumangalam Taluk, Thirumangalam, Madurai District.

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

ssb 29.03.2023