Madras High CourtWP(MD)/11663/2013disposed of

Oyammal v. The District Collector,

2017-12-15Honourable Mr Justice R. Mahadevan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15.12.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P(MD)No.11663 of 2013 Oyammal .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Office of the Collectorate, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai.

3.Mooka Ilangan [Writ petition against the third respondent is dismissed for default, vide order, dated 30.11.2015].

4.K.Oyammal .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to consider the representation, dated 29.01.2013.

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Senthil For Respondents 1 and 2 : Mr.M.Alagathevan, Special Government Pleader.

For Respondent No.4 : No appearance

ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to issue patta in the name of the petitioner, for the property, admeasuring 66 cents, comrpised in Old Survey No.119-1B and New Survey No.38/1, II Bit Anaiyur, Madurai, based on her representation, dated 29.01.2013. 2.Heard both sides. Despite notice being served on the fourth respondent and her name is being printed in the cause list, there is no representation on behalf of the fourth respondent https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

either in person or through Counsel.

3.According to the petitioner, since the patta in respect of her property, admesuring 66 cents, comprised in Old Survey No.119-1B and New Survey No.38/1, II Pit Anaiyur, Madurai, was issued in the names of the respondents 3 and 4, she made a representation, dated 29.01.2013, to the second respondent, seeking to issue patta in respect of the said property, in her name. Since, the same has not been considered so far, the petitioner is before this Court.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it would be suffice, if the representation of the petitioner, dated 29.01.2013, is directed to be disposed of, by the second respondent, as per law.

5.Considering the limited scope of the relief sought for, this Court, without going into the merits of the petitioner's claim, directs the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 29.01.2013 and pass appropriate orders, if not disposed of earlier, on its own merit and in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as all the interested parties including the fourth respondent, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6.The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CSII) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar smn To 1.The District Collector, Office of the Collectorate, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai.

+1cc to M/S SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, Sr.No. 93338 +1 CC TO Mr.D.SENTHIL , Advocate, Sr.No. 93061 JAM/05/01/2018/KKR/ SAR 1/ 2P-5C ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.11663 of 2013 15.12.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/