Dismissed

Amit Kumar Agarwal v. District Revenue Officer

Madras HC2 Jan 2017WP/19854/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging the cancellation of a patta entry regarding agricultural land, the Court held that the petitioner must first utilize the available appeal remedy before the District Revenue Officer. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable without availing this alternative remedy.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed; no interim order was granted.

Amit Kumar Agarwal Vs District Revenue Officer — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 02.01.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.No.19854 of 2013 and

¶6

M.P.Nos.1 to 3 of 2013

¶7

Amit Kumar Agarwal .. Petitioner
..vs..
1. The District Revenue Officer,
Tiruvallur District,
Tiruvallur.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Ambattur,
Chennai.
3. The Tahsildar,
Ambattur Taluk,
Ambattur, Chennai. .. Respondents

¶8

Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the 2^nd respondent in proceedings Na.Ka.No.1373/2013/A5 dated 06.06.2013, quash the same.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Saravanakumar

¶10

For Respondents : Mr.S.Diwakar,

¶11

Special Government Pleader

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition, challenging the order passed by the 2^nd respondent in Proceedings Na.Ka.No.1373/2013/A5 dated 06.06.2013 by cancelling the wrong entry made in the patta in Survey No.242/1 to an extent of 0.14.5 hectares of land.

¶14

According to the petitioner, a patta was granted in favour of the petitioner in S.No.242/1 by the Tahsildar, Ambattur Taluk, Ambattur, the 3^rd respondent herein. Subsequently, by the impugned proceedings dated 06.06.2013, the 2^nd respondent, namely, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ambattur, Chennai, cancelled the patta granted in respect of Survey https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ No.242/1 as per the proceedings No.8A/1095/1422 dated 05.09.2013 granted in favour of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said impugned order, the petitioner is before this Court with this

¶15

Writ Petition.

¶16

The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that there is no interim order granted by this Court at the time of admission. If at all, the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the 2^nd respondent, the petitioner can very well avail the appeal remedy before the competent authority. Hence, the writ petition is not maintainable before this Court.

¶17

After considering the submission made by the counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that against the impugned order passed by the 2^nd respondent cancelling the patta in respect of S.No.242/1, the petitioner can file an appeal before the competent authority, namely, the District Revenue Officer. But, without resorting to the said remedy, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition before this Court cannot be entertained.

¶18

With the above observation, the writ petition is dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to file an appeal before the District Revenue Officer, Tiruvallur, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if so advised. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. Sd/Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar tsi To 1. The District Revenue Officer, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ambattur, Chennai. 3. The Tahsildar, Ambattur Taluk, Ambattur, Chennai. +1cc to Mr.R.Saravanakumar, Advocate sr.454 +1cc to The Government Pleader sr.436

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ gjII(co) ss(25/01/2017)

¶20

W.P.No.19854 of 2013

Amit Kumar Agarwal v. District Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar Agarwal v. District Revenue Officer

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

Sennappan Vs The Tasildhar

M/S. Nikita Traders, Vs the Commissioner of Customs

Mrs.Clara Vs Director General of Police

Chattramal Baid Vs District Revenue Officer

Dr.S.Karthikeyan Vs the Principal Secretary to

P.Rangasamy, President, Vs the District Collector