Sathaiah v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :21.11.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.26289 & 26290 of 2025 Sathaiah ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai.

2. Ramu ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the respondent in Oo.Mu.3535/2025/A6 dated 27.10.2025 and quash the same as illegal. For Petitioner : Mr. V.Vijayendiran For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasubramani Special Government Pleader 1/4

O R D E R

An order dated 27.10.2025 of the Revenue Divisional Officer rejecting the petitioner's request for cancellation of the patta granted to the second respondent is challenged in this Writ Petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a civil suit in O.S.No.10 of 2024 was filed by him against the second respondent and others before the District Munsif Court, Aranthangi seeking cancellation of general power of attorney dated 01.11.1999, sale deed dated 14.08.2000 and for relief ancillary thereto. While the suit is pending, he submits that the patta has been granted in favour of the second respondent and that the first respondent exceeded jurisdiction by directing removal of construction and by determining title.

2. Learned Special Government Pleader accepts notice for the first respondent. He submits that the petitioner was heard before the impugned order was issued and that the said order was issued after noticing that the second respondent had purchased the property under a sale deed bearing Doc.No.2850 of 2000. He also points out that the petitioner had encroached upon a pathway which is being used by the 2/4

public.

3. On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that the petitioner was heard before such order was issued. It also appears that all material documents were taken into consideration and factual findings were recorded. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the order in the exercise of discretionary jurisdiction. Hence, by leaving it open to the petitioner to prosecute the civil suit or file a revision petition before the District Revenue Officer, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. NCS : Yes/No 21.11.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd To

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai.

3/4

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY.,J.

apd ORDER MADE IN 21.11.2025 4/4