M.A Mohammed Mariam Beevi v. The State Level Valuation Committee
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.12.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI M.A.Mohammed Mariam Beevi
...Petitioner
Vs 1.The State Level Valuation Committee, represented by its Chairman, Inspector General of Registration.
2.The District Collector, Office of the District Collectorate, Ramanathapuram.
3.The District Registrar, Office of the District Registrar, Ramanathapuram.
4.The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Office, Ramanathapuram, 5.The District Valuation Sub Committee, Representation by its Chairman, Office of the District Collectorate, 1/5
6.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional officer,
...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pass final order on the application dated 14.01.2025 for revision of the guideline value qua the land compromised in S.No.178/1F1, Keelakarai Village, Keelakarai Taluk, Ramanathapuram District within the period that may be fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mrs.H.Jasima Yasmin For Respondents : Mr.M.Sarangan, Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The petitioner is having a farm land in S.No.178/1F1 at Keelakarai Village, Keelakarai Taluk, Ramanathapuram District and this land has been classified as residential area, instead of agricultural farm. Therefore, the guideline value now fixed is higher than the actual value. In this regard the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 14.01.2025 for refixation of the guideline value. Based on her representation the 2nd respondent by his proceedings dated 06.05.2025 2/5
directed the 3rd respondent to conduct a field inspection and to submit a report.
2.According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the 3rd and 6th respondents have conducted a joint inspection and have also submitted a report dated 26.06.2025. Even after the report dated 26.06.2025, the classification of the land has not been changed. Therefore, she has submitted a further representation and filed this writ petition. 3.Mr.M.Sarangan, learned Additional Government Pleader, who takes notice for the respondents and submits that the committee is headed by the District Collector and he has to take a decision in this regard. However the district level valuation sub-committee consisting of the respondents 3 and 6 have already conducted a field inspection and have filed a report dated 26.06.2025.
4.This court considered the rival submissions made. 3/5
5.Since a report has already been submitted after causing inspection and a decision is yet to be taken, this writ petition is allowed with a direction to the 5th respondent to take a call as per the recommendation dated 26.06.2025 within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. 08.12.2025 DSK To 1.The Inspector General of Registration, The Chairman / State Level Valuation Committee. 2.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram.
3.The District Registrar, Ramanathapuram.
4.The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram.
5.The District Valuation Sub Committee, Representation by its Chairman, Office of the District Collectorate, 6.The Revenue Divisional Officer, 4/5
B.PUGALENDHI.J., DSK 08.12.2025 5/5