Disposed

K.Gandhi, v. The Thasildar

Madras HC16 Dec 2015WP/39586/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking expedited consideration of a pending patta representation for demarcated land. The Court directed the Thasildar to consider the representation, afford an opportunity of hearing, and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondent directed to consider pending patta representation, afford hearing opportunity, and pass orders within eight weeks.

K.Gandhi, Vs The Thasildar — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 16.12.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH

¶5

W.P. No. 39586 of 2015

¶6

K.Gandhi ...Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The Thasildar, Ulundurpet, Villupuram District. 2. R.Amudha ...Respondents PRAYER: This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the petitioner representation dated 20.11.2015 to issue separate patta after demarcating the petitioner land to an extent of 50 cents in survey No. 61/4A situated at Sreedevi Madura Village, Ulundurpet Taluk, Villupuram District.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.P.R.Thiruneelakandan, For Respondent 1 : Mr.S.Pattabiraman, Government Advocate ORDER

¶10

Placing reliance upon the decree rendered in O.A. No. 690 of 1995, followed by a registered sale deed dated 07.07.2000, the petitioner made a representation on 20.11.2015, seeking issuance of separate patta for the property situated in Survey No. 61/4A situated at Sreedevi Madura Village, Ulundurpet Taluk, Villupuram District. As the said representation is still pending consideration, seeking to expedite the same, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner before this Court.

¶11

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondent No. 1.

¶12

Considering the pendency of the representation of the petitioner dated 20.11.2015, the respondent No. 1 is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on the pending representation of the

¶13

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

¶14

petitioner dated 20.11.2015, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 2.

¶15

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶16

Assistant Registrar

¶17

//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
The Thasildar,
Ulundurpet, Villupuram District.
+1cc to The Government Pleader Sr.68176
+1cc to Mr.P.R.Thirneelakandan, Advocate sr.67695
W.P.No. 39586 of 2015
kji9co0
srg 28/12/2015

¶18

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

K.Gandhi, v. The Thasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Gandhi, v. The Thasildar

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

Anil Kumar Sharma, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

M.Jayakumar Vs The State Bank of India

R.Kumar Vs The Secretary to the

The Pharmaceutical Manufacture Vs Tamilnadu Medical Services

Rajadevi Vs 1.THE Govt., of Tn Rep.by Secy

Mary Basilika Vs the Principal Secretary