← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/26855/2024disposed of

V.Ravi v. The Assistant Director (Survey)

2026-01-08Honourable Mr.Justice K. Surender6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :08.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDER V.Ravi ... Petitioner(s) Vs.

1. The Assistant Director (Survey, Virudhunagar.

2. The Tahsildar, Virudhunagar Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

3. The Taluk Surveyor, Virudhunagar Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

4.The Revenue Divsisional Officer, Aruppukottai.

(R4 suo motu impleaded by this order) ... Respondent(s) PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to rectify the error made in the FMB Sketch regarding the extent of 1/6

the property based on the Manaivari patta issued in favour of the petitioners father in Patta No.187, Natham Old S. No.152/1 Part, Natham New S. No.213/11, Sevalpatti, Kooraikundu Village, Virudhunagar Taluk and District by considering the petitioners representation dated 14.08.2024.

For Petitioner : Mr. G.R.Satish For Respondents :Mr.D.Sadiq Raja Addl. Government Pleader for R1 to R3

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to rectify the error made in the FMB Sketch regarding the extent of the property based on the Manaivari patta issued in favour of the petitioner's father in Patta No. 187, Natham Old S. No.152/1 Part, Natham New S. No.213/11, Sevalpatti, Kooraikundu Village, Virudhunagar Taluk and District by considering the petitioners representation dated 14.08.2024.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. The petitioner submitted a representation dated 14.08.2024 to the respondents seeking rectification of the error made in the FMB 2/6

Sketch in respect of the properties referred to above. However, no action has been taken on the said representation. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

4. Learned Additional Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 3, submits that the Revenue Divisional Officer is the competent authority to take appropriate action in this regard. However, the petitioner has not impleaded him as a party to this writ petition.

5. In view of the above submissions, this Court suo motu impleads the Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukottai, as the fourth respondent and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the fourth respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer to consider the petitioner's representation dated 14.08.2024 on 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.

6. The representation shall be considered and disposed of after conducting an inquiry. The fourth respondent is further directed to afford 3/6

a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and to all other persons who may be affected by such decision during the course of the inquiry. There shall be no order as to costs.

(K.SURENDER, J) 08.01.2026 NCC :Yes/No Internet :Yes/No Index :Yes/No PKN 4/6

To

1. The Assistant Director (Survey, Virudhunagar.

2. The Tahsildar, Virudhunagar Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

3. The Taluk Surveyor, Virudhunagar Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

4.The Revenue Divsisional Officer, Aruppukottai.

5/6

K.SURENDER, J.

PKN 08.01.2026 6/6