A.Mahalakshmi v. The District Collector,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.08.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR A.Mahalakshmi ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
2.The District Revenue Officer, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi Division, Virudhunagar District.
4.The Tahsildar, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
5.Mookkaiah 6.Perumalsamy 7.Krishnasamy 8.Subburaj ... Respondents Prayer:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to
4 herein to cancel the Patta No.466 issued in favour of No.5 to 8 Respondent's father in connection with property comprised in Survey No. 326/1A to an extent of 8 cents situated at Subramaniyapuram, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District and restore the same, on the basis of the Petitioner's representation dated 10.01.2025 within time frame stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Maya Perumal For R1 to R4 : Mr.D.S.Nedunchezian Government Advocate
ORDER
The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 herein to cancel the Patta No.466 issued in favour of the father of the respondents 5 to 8, in respect of the property comprised in Survey No. 326/1A, with an extent of 8 cents, in Subramaniyapuram, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 10.01.2025.
2.Heard the arguments of Mr.S.Maya Perumal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.D.S.Nedunchezian, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 4. Since no
adverse order is passed against the respondents 5 to 8, notice to them is dispensed with.
3.By consent of both sides, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
4.According to the petitioner, 8 cents of land in the above mentioned survey number was purchased by the petitioner's father, Lakshmana Perumal Samy Naicker from Seenivasaga Naicker and another, under a registered sale deed dated 21.11.1956. However, during UDR correction, the revenue records were mutated in favour of the private respondent's father, Ramasamy Naicker, in respect of the entire extent of 58 cents in the said survey number including eight cents purchased petitioner's father. Subsequently, private respondents entered into a partition deed based on the UDR patta. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation on 10.01.2025 seeking cancellation of the patta issued in the name of the private respondents and also the partition deed entered into among them.
5.The request of the petitioner seeking cancellation of the partition deed cannot be considered by the revenue officials. However, the main grievance of the petitioner appeared to be the alleged erroneous UDR correction in favour of Ramasamy Naicker. As far as the erroneous UDR correction is concerned, the second respondent is the competent authority.
6.Therefore, the second respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 10.01.2025, insofar as the grievance regarding UDR correction is concerned and pass final orders on its own merits within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, private respondents 5 to 8 and other interested parties. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 28.08.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No cp
To 1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
2.The District Revenue Officer, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi Division, Virudhunagar District.
4.The Tahsildar, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
S.SOUNTHAR ,J cp W.P.(MD)No.23199 of 2025 Dated: 28.08.2025