Madras High CourtWP(MD)/3660/2013dismissed

Kaliappa Nadar v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

2016-11-16Honourable Mr Justice V. Bharathidasan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.11.2016 Coram:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN W.P.(MD)No.3660 of 2013 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2013 Kaliappa Nadar .. Petitioner -Vs1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tenkasi Revenue Division, Tenkasi - Taluk, Tirunelveli - District.

2.The Tahsildar, Sankarankovil-Taluk, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli-District.

.. Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to transfer the patta in the name of petitioner (Kaliappa Nadar) and his wife Guruvammal from their vendor S.R.Rajaiah Chettiar, for the nanjai lands of 59 cents in S.No.92/1 situated in Karivalamvandanallur, in Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

For Petitioner : Mr.F.X.Eugene For Respondents : Mr.K.Magesh Raja Government Advocate

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to transfer the patta in the name of petitioner (Kaliappa Nadar) and his wife Guruvammal, which stands in the name of their vendor S.R.Rajaiah Chettiar, for the nanjai lands of 59 cents in S.No.92/1 situated in Karivalamvandanallur, in Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.The prayer in the writ petition is to consider the representation dated 18.01.2013 and transfer the patta in the name of the petitioner and his wife from their vendor. Even though, the petitioner has filed an application earlier, no order has been passed. Hence, he filed the writ petition in W.P.No.5892 of 2009 and this Court by order dated 09.07.2009, directed the Tahsildar to consider the representation and pass orders. Even thereafter, no orders has been passed, the present writ petition has been filed.

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 4.Today, the learned Government Advocate would submit that the application filed by the petitioner before the Tahsildar was considered and the order was passed on 03.11.2009, rejecting the request of the petitioner. Subsequently, the petitioner also approached the Revenue Divisional Officer by way of an appeal on 17.11.2009 and the Revenue Divisional Officer passed an order dated 25.04.2013, rejecting his appeal, and also produced the copy of the order.

5.In the above circumstances, the prayer sought for by the petitioner in the writ petition cannot be granted and the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(RTI) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tenkasi Revenue Division, Tenkasi - Taluk, Tirunelveli - District.

2.The Tahsildar, Sankarankovil-Taluk, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli-District.

+1 cc to M/s.F.X.Eugene, Advocate in SR.No. 69631 +1 cc to The Special Government Pleader in SR.No. 69757 W.P.(MD)No.3660 of 2013 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2013 16.11.2016 vsa CSL/SK-SKN/02.12.2016: 2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/