S Chitra v. The Executive Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY W.P.(MD)No.34916 of 2025 S.Chitra ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Executive Officer, Batlagundu Town Panchayat, Batlagundu, Dindigul District.

2.K.Krishnamoorthi ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.199/2025/A3 dated 11.09.2025 and quash the same as illegal and in furtherance directing the first respondent to mutate the property tax assessment vide No.6333 in respect of the petitioner's house property comprised in Survey No.1330/4 (Old Survey No.412B/10A1A1A) bearing Door No.2 situated at 1/6

Pasumpon Street No.1, Batlagundu Town Panchayat and Village, Nilakottai Taluk, Dindigul District within the time limit prescribed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Lawrance For Respondent No.1 : Mr.J.K.Jayaselan, Government Advocate

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.199/2025/A3 dated 11.09.2025 and for a consequential direction to the first respondent to mutate the property tax assessment vide No.6333 in respect of the petitioner's house property comprised in Survey No.1330/4 (Old Survey No.412B/10A1A1A) bearing Door No.2 situated at Pasumpon Street No.1, Batlagundu Town Panchayat and Village, Nilakottai Taluk, Dindigul District. 2.Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had given an application to the first respondent for mutation of the property tax assessment in her name. The said application came to be rejected by the first respondent on 11.09.2025, without even providing an opportunity to the 2/6

petitioner, citing the reason that an objection letter has been received from the second respondent regarding mutation. 3.Learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent fairly submitted that no opportunity was provided to the petitioner before passing the impugned order. Hence, he would submit that this Court may set aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to the first respondent for fresh consideration.

4.Heard the learned Counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

5.Considering the fair submission made by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent that no opportunity has been granted to the petitioner, the impugned order passed by the first respondent is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to the first respondent for fresh consideration. The first respondent shall issue notice to the petitioner as well as the second respondent, hear both parties in person, consider the documents placed before him and thereafter take a decision regarding mutation of records, on merits and in accordance with law, within a 3/6

period of eight [8] weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6.With the aforesaid direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 02.12.2025 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No MR 4/6

To The Executive Officer, Batlagundu Town Panchayat, Batlagundu, Dindigul District.

5/6

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

MR W.P.(MD)No.34916 of 2025 02.12.2025 6/6