Rajammal v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 12.04.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN W.P(MD).No.29115 of 2022 and WMP(MD)No.23085 of 2022 Rajammal ... Petitioner Vs

1. The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2. The District Revenue Officer, Madurai District, Madurai.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur, Madurai District.

4. The Tahsildar, Melur, Madurai District.

5. Ramamoorthy ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of second respondent in Na.Ka.No. G2/18893/2022, dated 28.04.2022 consequently third respondent's impugned 1/5

order in Ni.Mu.No. 7186/2014/N, dated 29.12.2014 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to rectify the joint patta in Patta No. 584, within a time frame that may be stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr. S.Sivaprakash For R1 to R4 : Mr.D.S.Nedunchezhian Government Advocate For R5 : Mr.T.Veerakumar

O R D E R

The Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Certiorarified Mandamus, relating to a notice issued by the second respondent/District Revenue Officer, Madurai District, Madurai in Na.Ka.No. G2/18893/2022, dated 28.04.2022 and to interfere with the same. 2.The fourth respondent had granted patta with respect to lands at S.No. 6/2 measuring 2.65hectares (6 acres and 56 cents) at Pottapatti Village, Melur Taluk, Madurai District. There was a dispute relating to that particular order and the matter travelled to the third respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur, Madurai District. Questioning the order passed therein, a revision has been filed by the petitioner, with much delay before the second 2/5

respondent. By the impugned notice, the second respondent had called upon the writ petitioner to explain the reasons for delay. 3.It is for the petitioner to explain the delay and produce the order before the second respondent. This Court never step into the shoes of the second respondent and adjudicate the matter. The petitioner has been issued with notice, she has to appear before the said authority and answer to the notice.

4.A direction is given to the petitioner and the fifth respondent to co-operate during the enquiry conducted by the second respondent. The petitioner has to explain the delay and on that particular aspect, the second respondent has to pass separate order. Depending upon the outcome of the said order, the second respondent has to decide to either to take up the matter further or to pass a consequential order. The said exercise should be completed within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

3/5

5.With the above directions, this Writ Petition is stands disposed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 12.04.2023 NCS : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes/ No PNM To

1. The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2. The District Revenue Officer, Madurai District, Madurai.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur, Madurai District.

4. The Tahsildar, Melur, Madurai District.

4/5

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

PNM ORDER IN W.P(MD).No.29115 of 2022 and WMP(MD)No.23085 of 2022 12.04.2023 5/5