V.Sankaran v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDER V.Sankaran ... Petitioner -vs1.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2.The Tahsildar, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District.

3.The Commissioner, Dindigul City Municipal Corporation, Dindigul.

4.The Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Ellis Nagar, Madurai.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to grant a Patta in the Petitioner's name for the vacant land measures 1120 sq. ft. situated on the northern side of his plot bearing Plot No.H2/M2-232J, which is part of Survey

No.649/B Part in Chettinayakanpatti Village, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District, considering his representation dated 10.10.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ramnath For R1 and R2 : Mr.R.Ragavendran Government Advocate For R3 : Mr.J.Lawrance Standing Counsel For R4 : Mr.R.Sivakumar Standing Counsel

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to grant patta in the name of the petitioner in respect of the vacant land measuring 1120 sq.ft., situated on the northern side of his plot bearing Plot No.H2/M2-232J, forming part of Survey No.649/B (Part), Chettinayakanpatti Village, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 10.10.2025.

2. By consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been using and enjoying a vacant land measuring 1120 sq. ft., situated on the northern side of his plot. Since the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the said vacant land, he is entitled to be granted patta.

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submits that the said area has been earmarked as a park.

5. Considering the aforesaid submissions, this Court is of the view that the question of granting patta in respect of land earmarked for a park, which is meant for public purpose, does not arise. However, keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has made a representation dated 10.10.2025 and has paid the requisite fees, it is for the second respondent to dispose of the said representation on merits and in accordance with law, based on the facts of the case, by assigning reasons either for acceptance or rejection.

6. With the above observation, this Writ Petition stands disposed of, directing the second respondent to consider and dispose of the representation of

the petitioner dated 10.10.2025 on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other interested persons, if any, and to pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. NCC : Yes / No (K.SURENDER, J.) Index : Yes / No 17.12.2025 smn2 To:- 1.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2.The Tahsildar, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District.

3.The Commissioner, Dindigul City Municipal Corporation, Dindigul.

4.The Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Ellis Nagar, Madurai.

K.SURENDER , J.

smn2 17.12.2025