Vellaiyammal v. The Tahsildar

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 26.08.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR and W.M.P(MD) No.18273 of 2025 Vellaiyammal ... Petitioner Vs.

The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

... Respondent Prayer:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the respondent in No. 2025/0105/22/288171 dated 11.08.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondent to transfer patta in the petitioner's name in respect of the property comprised in Survey No. 11/10, to an extent of 111.48 Sq.Mt., situated at Kottur Village, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 02.05.2025 within the time frame that may be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.E.Balasubramanian For Respondent : Mrs.S.Jeya Priya Government Advocate

ORDER

The writ petition is filed challenging the order passed by the respondent rejecting the request of the petitioner seeking patta transfer. 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit the impugned order has been passed without hearing the petitioner and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside. 3.The learned Government Advocate, on instruction, would submit that no notice was issued to the petitioner before passing the impugned order.

4.According to the petitioner, he purchased 111.48 sq.mt of land in the subject Survey No.11/10, situated in Kottur Village, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District, under a registered sale deed dated

22.07.2010 from one Ganesan. Based on the said sale deed, he applied for a patta transfer before the respondents on 02.05.2025. The said application was rejected by the respondent on the ground that there was a dispute with regard to the four boundaries and title over the property. 5.A reading of the impugned order would suggest that after submission of the application by the petitioner, the respondent called for a report from the Village Administrative Officer. Based on the report submitted by the Village Administrative Officer, the impugned order has been passed without hearing the petitioner.

6.In fact, the learned Government Advocate, on instructions, fairly submitted that the impugned order was passed without hearing the petitioner.

7.In view of the same, there is a clear violation of principles of natural justice. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the respondent is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the file of the respondent with a direction to consider the application of the petitioner

afresh and pass final order in accordance with the law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. 8.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 26.08.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No cp To The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

S.SOUNTHAR ,J cp W.P.(MD)No.23251 of 2025 Dated: 26.08.2025