Disposed

Devudu, v. The District Collector

Madras HC22 Mar 2016WP/10539/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the High Court directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation for issuing a patta, conduct an enquiry, and pass an order within twelve weeks, without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent to consider the representation, conduct enquiry, and dispose of the matter within twelve weeks.

Devudu, Vs The District Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 22.03.2016

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH

W.P.No.10539 of 2016

Devudu

Vs.

The District Collector, Salem District.

¶9

The Tahsildar, Mettur Taluk, Salem District ... Respondents

¶10

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent, the Tahsildar, Mettur Taluk, to issue patta to the petitioner in respect of Door No.F-48, Kooli Line, Mettur, Mettur Taluk, Salem District, considering the representation, dated 21.07.2015.

¶11

For Petitioner : M/s.Sumithra Vasudevan For Respondent : Mr.P.Sanjay Gandhi, Addl.G.P.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to issue patta to the petitioner in respect of Door No.F-48, Kooli Line, Mettur, Mettur Taluk, Salem District, considering the representation, dated 21.07.2015.

¶14

It is averred by the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition that he is residing in the above address and working as Scavenger in Mettur Municipality for the past 25 years. He married one Malliga (sister's daughter) on 06.02.1992 and got three children. He has produced Family Card, Election Identity Card, Water Bill, Salary Certificate, in proof of the petitioner residing in the above address. The said house measures 15 feet as breadth and 30 feet as length and it is a tiled house and it is in his possession and enjoyment without any hindrance for the past 48 years. The petitioner made a representation, dated 21.07.2015 to the respondents for issuance of patta in respect of the above said property. Since no action

¶15

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

¶16

is taken, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition for the above relief.

¶17

Heard both sides.

¶18

Taking into consideration the factual aspects of the matter, without going into the merits of the case, this Court directs the second respondent to consider the said representation, dated 21.07.2015 of the petitioner and after conducting enquiry and giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and necessary parties, pass appropriate orders and dispose of the said representation, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and it is for the second respondent to decide the same.

¶19

With the above observations and directions, the Writ
Petition is disposed of. No costs.
-s/d-
Assistant Registrar
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
cs
Copy to
1. The District Collector, Salem District.
2. The Tahsildar, Mettur Taluk, Salem District.
+1 cc to the Government Pleader sr.18404
+1 cc to Mr.B.Vasudevan Advocate sr.17984
W.P.No.10539 of 2016

¶20

aa12/04/2016

¶21

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

Devudu, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devudu, 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

S.Kalaiganh Vs The District Civil Supply

Uma Mageshwari, Vs The Commissioner of Police

S.Adhipathi, Vs The Superintendent of Police

C.Peragounder Vs The Inspector of Police

K.Dravida Mani, (Organizer) Vs State Rep. by its

R.Karthikeyan Vs State