Disposed

S.Jaganathan v. the District Collector

Madras HC17 Aug 2015WP/29453/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner sought restoration of land classification and cancellation of patta. The court disposed of the matter without adjudicating merits, directing the petitioner to submit representation copies and ordering authorities to issue notices and decide the pendency within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit representation; Respondents 1 & 2 ordered to issue notices and pass orders within 8 weeks.

S.Jaganathan Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATE: 17-08-2015

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH

¶5

W.P.No.29453 of 2013

¶6

S. Jaganathan Petitioner
Vs
1. The District Collector
Krishnagiri District
2. The Settlement Officer
Survey and Settlement Department
Chepauk
Chennai – 5
3. M. Chinnasamy
4. Srinivasan @ Chankarai
5. Sivalingam
6. Thangavel
7. Arunachalam
8. Kannan
9. Siva Respondents

¶7

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 19-08-2013 and pass necessary orders restoring the original classification of the land 10 cents in S.No.323/2 Rangampatti Village, Pochampalli Taluk, Krishnagiri District and cancelling the patta issued to the respondent Nos.3 to 6 and father of the respondent Nos.7 to 9 after issuing notice to all the concerned parties and conducting enquiry and further issue joint patta to the petitioner and other co-owners with respect to the said 10 cents of land within the time frame fixed by this Court.

¶8

For petitioner :: Mr. P. Mani For respondents:: Mr. P. Sanjay Gandhi, AGP for RR1 & 2 Mr. E. Kannadasan for RR3 to 9

¶9

ORDER

¶10

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶11

Placing reliance upon the sale deed of the year 2006 followed by a mortgage deed and the chitta and adangal to the property at

¶12

Survey NO.323/2, Rangampatti Village,Pochampalli Taluk, Krishnagiri District, the petitioner made a representationon 19-08-2013 stating that the patta land has been re-classified as Natham land and therefore, a fresh patta will have to be issued as 'private land'. As the said representation has not been disposed of, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶13

Taking into consideration of the pendency of the representation,without going into the merits of the case, the petitioner is directed to enclose a copy of the representation along with a copy of this order within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of such representation, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to pass appropriate orders by issuing notice to the petitioner as well as the private respondents, within a period of eight weeks, thereafter.

¶14

With the above observations, the writ petition is
disposed of. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
True Copy
Sub Assistant Registrar
glp
To
1. The District Collector
Krishnagiri District
2. The Settlement Officer
Survey and Settlement Department
Chepauk
Chennai – 5
1 cc to Mr.P.Mani, Counsel for the petitioner Sr.No.43169
1 cc to Government Pleader.Sr.No.43457
1 cc to Mr.E. Kannadasan , Advocate Sr.No.43590
W.P.No.29453 of 2013
vgi(co)
pmk.9.9.2015

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Jaganathan v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Jaganathan v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K. Rajendiran Vs Inspector of Police

K.M.Samiyappan Vs The Assistant Director of

B.Shanmugasundaram, Vs The Chief Manager

R.Usharani Vs the Assistant General

N.Manoj Vs District Collector

D.Govindammal Vs the District Collector