Disposed

G.Iyanar v. The District Collector

Madras HC9 May 2017WP/17422/2014

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 application for issuance of patta in respect of a plot purchased by him and pass orders on merits within twelve weeks without examining the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Directive to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application dated 23.12.2013 for issuance of patta and pass orders on merits within twelve weeks.

G.Iyanar Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 09.05.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶5

WP.No.17422 of 2014

¶6

G.Iyanar .. Petitioner
Versus
1. The District Collector,
Kancheepuram District,
at Kancheepuram.
2. The Tahsildar,
Sholinganallur Taluk,
at Sholinganallur, Chennai-119 .. Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of
India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing
the respondents to consider the petitioner's application dated
23.12.2013.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Muniratnam for M/s.A.Ramu
For Respondents : Mr.K.Dhanajeyan, SGP
O R D E R

¶7

The present writ petition is filed for a direction to consider the petitioner's application dated 23^th December, 2013 for issuance of patta in respect of the plot purchased by him bearing plot No.21 to an extent of 680.5 sq.ft. out of 1905.75 sq.ft. comprised in Survey No.131 as per Patta Survey No.131/4B in Patta No.1632 situated at Door No.63, Kazhiveli Salai, now known as V.P.K.Salai, Perungudi Village, the then Tambaram Taluk, now Sholinganallur Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

¶8

In respect of the same location, more specifically in respect of plot No.19 purchased by K.Harikrishnan, this Court passed an order on 07.04.2017 in WP.No.23664 of 2014. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that similar relief may be granted in this writ petition also.

¶9

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

¶10

Accordingly, without going into the merits of the case, the second respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's application dated 23.12.2013 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶11

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶12

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CCC)

¶13

//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
AT
To
1. The District Collector,
Kancheepuram District,
at Kancheepuram.
2. The Tahsildar,
Sholinganallur Taluk,
at Sholinganallur, Chennai-119
+1cc to Mr.A.Ramu, Advocate, S.R.No.36985
WP.No.17422 of 2014
MP(CO)
CS/26/05/17

¶14

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

G.Iyanar v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Iyanar 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.Muralidharan, Vs the District Collector

C. Krishnamurthy Vs the Commr. Hr & Ce

K.Perumal Vs the Special Tahsildar

M.Balraj Vs the Life Insurance Corporation

E.Selvakumari Vs The District Collector

P.M.Krishnakumar Vs the Registrar