The court held the writ petition in W.P. No.4558 maintenable was premature due to available appellate remedies under the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act. The petition in W.P. No.4559 was withdrawn. Both were dismissed.
Writ petition W.P. No.4558 dismissed; W.P. No.4559 withdrawn and dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated:- 10.04.2013
Coram:-
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.Raja
W.P. No.4558 & 4559 of 2013
M.Chinnapillai ... Petitioner in both the WPs. vs. The District Collector, District Collectorate, Ariyalur District. ... R1 in both WPs The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Ariyalur District. ... R2 in WP.4558/13 The Assistant Director (Addl. Charge)/Direct Assistant (Survey Department), Land Survey and Records Dept., District Collectorate, Ariyalur District. ... R2 in WP.4559/13 Senguthuvan ... R3 in both WPs.
WP.4558/13:- Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the 2nd respondent to cancel patta No.588 relating to lands in Survey No.152/7 issued in favour of 3rd respondent and re-issue the patta in the petitioner's name.
WP.4559/13:- Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to survey the petitioner's land measuring 0.16 1/2 cents in Survey No.152/6, land measuring 0.16 1/2 cents in Survey No.152/7 cents and land measuring 0.96 cents in Survey No.152/8 with the help of competent surveyor.
COMMON ORDER
The prayer of the petitioner, who has filed both the above writ petitions, in W.P. No.4558 of 2013 is for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar, Ariyalur District, to cancel patta No.588 relating to the lands in Survey No.152/7 issued in favour of the 3rd respondent and re-issue the patta in the name of the petitioner.
Learned Additional Government pleader submitted that there is no postal acknowledgement or copy of the representation said to have been received with the seal of the R.D.O. Office is available to substantiate the claim of the petitioner, however, if an appeal is preferred to the appellate authority by the petitioner, if he is so advised, the same will be considered and disposed of by the appellate authority.
Recording the above submission of the learned Additional Government Pleader, by granting liberty to the petitioner to move an appeal before the authority concerned, if he is so advised, this Court dismisses the above writ petition.
of the lands of the petitioner. He has also made an endorsement to that effect on the bundle. Permission is granted. W.P. No.4559 of 2013 is dismissed as withdrawn.
Both the writ petitions are dismissed, accordingly. No costs.
Sd/ Assistant Registrar
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
JI.
To
1. The District Collector,
District Collectorate,
Ariyalur District.
2. The Tahsildar,
Tahsildar Office,
Ariyalur District.
3. The Assistant Director
(Addl. Charge)/Direct
Assistant (Survey Department),
Land Survey and Records Dept.,
District Collectorate,
Ariyalur District.
+1cc to Mr.S.Gunalan, Advocate, Sr.No.21039 +1cc to Mr.A.Tamilvanan , Advocate, Sr.No.21337 +1cc to Government Pleader, Sr.No. 21367 W.P. Nos.4558 & 4559/13.
SGL(CO) MS:02/05/2013
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's writ petition challenging the patta issuance is maintainable given the availability of statutory appeal remedies.
Whether the High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 is invoked prematurely when alternative forums exist.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
M. Chinnapillai
The District Collector
The Tahsildar
Senguthuvan
T. Raja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
