Palanisamy v. The District Collector

W.P.(MD) No.22863 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.12.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN W.P.(MD) No.22863 of 2021 Palanisamy ... Petitioner vs.

1.The District Collector, Madurai.

2.The Special Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare Alagu 2, Madurai.

3.The Tahsildar, Melur Taluk, Madurai District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 2 and 3 to measure the petitioner's property in Plot No.1, measuring 3 cents comprised in S.F.Nos.3/10 and 4/2 of Kongampatti Revenue Pirka Village, (Now Semminipatti Village) Melur Taluk, Madurai District within the reasonable time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Sekar For Respondents : Mr.J.John Rajadurai Government Advocate

O R D E R

The writ petition has been filed in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, seeking a direction to the respondents 2 and 3 to measure the petitioner's property in Plot No.1, measuring about 3 cents in S.F.Nos.3/10 and 4/2 of Kongampatti Revenue Firka Village, (Now Semminipatti Village), Melur Taluk, Madurai District. 2.The petitioner claims that the said housing plot had been assigned on 25.06.1998 by the second respondent by proceeding No.1606/98/A. Further, the second respondent had also assigned similar plots to 36 other beneficiaries whose lands are adjacent to the plot of the petitioner herein. It is claimed by the petitioner herein that the respondents delayed the process of measurement and fixing the exact four boundaries. The petitioner had given a representation in this regard. Now, a Mandamus is sought for a direction against the respondents 2 and 3 to measure the property of the petitioner aforementioned and to measure the property. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

W.P.(MD) No.22863 of 2021 3.It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that when the petitioner had directly approached the respondents, they had stated that they would undertake the said task, after computerization of records.

4.Till computerization records is done, Mandamus cannot be issued. This Court sought a time limit within which the computerization would be completed from the learned Government Advocate, Mr.J.John Rajadurai, who had taken notice on behalf of all the respondents.

5.However, the learned counsel for the petitioner insisted that the Mandamus must be issued.

6.Therefore, a mandamus is issued that after the computerization work is completed, the property of the petitioner must be measured within a reasonable time.

7.With the above observations, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (W) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) sji Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

To 1.The District Collector, Madurai.

2.The Special Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare Alagu 2, Madurai.

3.The Tahsildar, Melur Taluk, Madurai District.

+1 CC to M/s.P.GANAPATHI SUBRAMANIAN, Advocate ( SR-40368[F] dated 23/12/2021 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-40486[F] dated 27/12/2021 ) W.P.(MD) No.22863 of 2021 23.12.2021 RD(6.01.2022) 2P 6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2