Disposed

M.Noor Mohamed, v. The District Collector

Madras HC21 Nov 2017WP/11533/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a direction to restore a Patta in favor of the petitioners. The Court observed that the impugned order by the District Revenue Officer was not challenged. Consequently, the petitioners were granted liberty to initiate appropriate legal action, and the writ petition was closed without further adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted liberty to initiate appropriate legal action to challenge the unchallenged order of the District Revenue Officer; writ petition closed with no order as to costs.

M.Noor Mohamed, Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21.11.2017 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.11533 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.9957 of 2016

¶2

1.M.Noor Mohamed

¶3

2.N.Shahul Hameed Nachiar

¶4

... Petitioners

¶5

Vs
1.The District Collector,
Nagapattinam.
2.The District Revenue Officer,
Nagapattinam.
3.The District Registrar,
Nagapattinam.
4.The Deputy Tahsildar,
Nagapattinam.
5.Abu Ibrahim Saheb ... Respondents

¶6

Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the District Revenue Officer, Nagapattinam, the 2^nd respondent herein to restore the Patta granted in the names of the petitioners in respect of the lands comprised in Survey No.1151/2 (Old S.No.1151), Block 15, Ward-5, in Nagoor Town, Nagapattinam Taluk and District.

¶7

For Petitioner : Mr.M.V.Krishnan For Respondents : Mr.K.Thangapandi Government Advocate, for R1 to R4 Mr.S.Thirumavalavan, for R5

¶8

The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to the second respondent to restore the Patta granted in the names of the petitioners in respect of the lands comprised in Survey No.1151/2 (Old S.No.1151), Block 15, Ward-5, in Nagoor Town, Nagapattinam Taluk and District.

¶9

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

¶10

The learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent brought to the notice of this Court that the District Revenue Officer, Nagapattinam has passed an order in respect of grant of Patta claimed between the respective parties. However, the order passed by the District Revenue Officer, Nagapattinam, has not been challenged in this writ petition.

¶11

3.The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners request this Court to grant liberty to challenge the order passed by the District Revenue Officer, Nagapattinam.

¶12

This being the factum of the case, the petitioners are at liberty to initiate appropriate legal action in the manner known to law. Thus, no further adjudication is required in this writ petition.

¶13

Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶14

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS V)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ms
To
1.The District Collector,
Nagapattinam.

¶15

2.The District Revenue Officer, Nagapattinam.

¶16

3.The District Registrar, Nagapattinam.

¶17

4.The Deputy Tahsildar, Nagapattinam. +1 cc to Mr.M.V.Krishnan Advocate sr 82969 +1 cc to Mr.S.Thirumavalavan Advocate sr 82654 W.P.No.11533 of 2016

¶18

kgk(co) aa13/12/2017

¶19

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

M.Noor Mohamed, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Noor Mohamed, 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.Radhakrishanan Vs Varadarajan

M.Subramonia Pillai Vs Anita Praveen IAS

A.Siddiq Vs Dr.B.Prem Kumar

S.Sandanam Vs Dr.M.Devadoss

Chidambaranathan Vs The Secretary for Differently

V.Muthukumar, Vs the Chief Secretary to