Roy Richard .S v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.12.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDER and W.M.P.(MD) No.20223 of 2023 S.Roy Richard ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.
3.The Tahsildar, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to issue patta in the name of the petitioner in respect of the land in S.F.No.736/24 situate in Erichanatham Revenue Village, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Paneer Selvam Page No. 1 of 6
For Respondents : Mr.P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader *****
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to issue patta in the name of the petitioner in respect of the land comprised in S.F.No.736/24, situated at Erichanatham Revenue Village, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he purchased the land comprised in S.F.No.736/24, measuring an extent of 2 Acres, which is a narrow strip of land in the nature of a tail end and is unfit for regular cultivation or for any construction, for the purpose of accessing the petitioner's land in S.F.No.736/8, through a registered Sale Deed dated 30.09.2020. When the petitioner approached the third respondent, namely the Tahsildar, seeking issuance of patta, he came to know that in the revenue records, the said land in S.F.No.736/24 was shown as 'Government Tharisu'. Upon verification of the Adangal pertaining to the said land for the period from 1990 to 2019, i.e., Fasli Years 1400 to 1432, it was noticed that from Fasli Page No. 2 of 6
Year 1430 onwards, the land was described as 'Government Tharisu', whereas prior thereto, the name of the previous owner, namely Guruvammal, was entered in the owner column. As per the instructions received, the petitioner approached the second respondent, namely the Revenue Divisional Officer, on 04.08.2023 seeking rectification of the error that occurred during computerisation of the revenue records and for issuance of patta in his favour by virtue of the Sale Deed dated 30.09.2020.
3. Meanwhile, the revenue officials are taking steps to allot the subject land to third parties under the AVAS Plus Scheme on the basis of an erroneous entry, even though the land is unfit for any construction, being a tail-end strip and having hard rock over an extent of about one acre. The petitioner has been in continuous possession of the said land from the date of purchase. Even at the time of purchase, the records of the Registration Department indicated that the guideline value of the said property was fixed at Rs.2,00,000/- and not as '0', as would be the case for Government land. It is submitted that though the land originally belonged to the petitioner and the records reveal the same, the revenue officials are attempting to allot the same to others without taking into Page No. 3 of 6
consideration the petitioner's application seeking rectification of the error. Therefore, the petitioner was constrained to file the present Writ Petition.
4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner's application dated 04.08.2023 would be considered by the second respondent within a period of twelve weeks and that the petitioner may raise all relevant points before the second respondent, the Revenue Divisional Officer, along with the supporting records.
5. Recording the above submission and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent, the Revenue Divisional Officer, to consider the petitioner's application dated 04.08.2023 on its own merits and in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is at liberty to raise all relevant points before the second respondent along with the supporting records. Before passing any order, the second respondent is also directed to afford a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to any other interested parties who may be Page No. 4 of 6
affected by the decision. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. [K.SURENDER, J.] 17.12.2025 JEN Index : Yes / No Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order To 1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.
3.The Tahsildar, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
Page No. 5 of 6
K.SURENDER , J.
JEN 17.12.2025 Page No. 6 of 6