Muthukamatchi v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDER W.P.(MD)No.35719 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.28307 & 28310 of 2025 Muthukamatchi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Manamelkudi, Pudukkottai District.

2.The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Manamelkudi, Pudukkottai District.

3.Ammakkannu ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the first respondent in g.K. 1/6

3963/2024/m3 dated 03.09.2025 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and against the principles of natural justice.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Parthiban For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.P.Subbaraj, Special Government Pleader For Respondent No.3 : Mr.P.Prasanna

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned order of the first respondent in g.K.3963/2024/m3 dated 03.09.2025 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and against the principles of natural justice. 2.With the consent of the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 3.According to the petitioner, the property in Survey No.35/6 measuring 0.12.5 ares in Manamelkudi Taluk, Singavanam Village, Pudukkottai District belonged to the petitioner's father late Shanmugam. The patta also stood in his name for more than 35 years. The petitioner's father passed away on 13.01.2000. Thereafter, suddenly the impugned order dated 03.09.2025 came to 2/6

be passed by the first respondent modifying the patta in favour of the third respondent without any notice to the legal heirs of late Shanmugam. Hence, the present Writ Petition. 4.Heard the learned Counsel on either side.

5.The impugned order has been passed on the basis of the application made by the third respondent herein. The request was for issuance of patta in her name for the subject property. But the patta stood in the name of one R.Shanmugam, son of Rajamani Pillai. However, the impugned order has been passed in favour of the said third respondent / Ammakkannu. It is not in dispute that the said Shanmugam died on 13.01.2000, leaving behind 8 legal heirs. Also, in the impugned order, there is no mention about the death of the said Shanmugam nor about his legal heirs. Hence, the impugned order on the face of it suffers from illegality and the same needs to be set aside.

6.Accordingly, the impugned order dated 03.09.2025 is hereby set aside and the first respondent is directed to conduct an enquiry, after putting on notice all the legal heirs of deceased Shanmugam as well as any other rival claimants, if any and pass 3/6

orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four [4] weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7.With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

[K.SURENDER, J.] 15.12.2025 MR Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No 4/6

To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Manamelkudi, Pudukkottai District.

2.The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Manamelkudi, Pudukkottai District.

5/6

K.SURENDER, J.

MR W.P.(MD)No.35719 of 2025 15.12.2025 6/6