Disposed

Pazhaniammal v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC13 Dec 2017WP/32453/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a mandatory survey of specific lands by the Revenue Tahsildar. The court, noting a lack of subsequent representations by the petitioner, directed the party to make a fresh representation with necessary fees for the matter to be considered on merits. The petition was disposed of with liberty granted to make such fresh representation.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to make a fresh representation with fees for survey consideration; petition disposed of with liberty granted.

Pazhaniammal Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer — Property and Title | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED:13.12.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVICHANDRABAABU

W.P.No.32453 of 2017

Pazhaniammal

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer,

¶10

Erode.

¶11

The Revenue Tahsildar, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer,

¶12

Erode. ... Respondents

¶13

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 2^nd respondent herein to carry out the Survey of the Petitioner lands measuring an extent of 3.3 cents situated in S.No.99, R.S.No.146/2, Natham Survey No.1436 and 295 to 312 Soorampatti Village, Erode Taluk and District and determine the boundaries pursuant to the receipt dated 17.05.2005 towards payment made by the petitioner in favour of the 1^st respondent towards the cost of inspection.

¶14

For Petitioner :Ms.S.Vijayalakshmi For Respondents :Mr.R.Govindasamy,

¶15

Special Government Pleader

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

Mr.R.Govindasamy, Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents and by consent of the parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶18

The petitioner seeks for survey of her land based on the request made as early as in the month of May, 2005.

¶19

Admittedly, the petitioner has not made any subsequent representations so far. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the second respondent with necessary fees and if any such representation is given, the second respondent will consider the same on its own merits and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶20

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

¶21

With the above observation and granting such liberty to the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶22

s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-III)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
vsi
To
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Erode.
2. The Revenue Tahsildar,
Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Erode.
+1 CC to Mr.D. Rajagopal, Advocate sr 88811.
+1 CC to Govt. Pleader sr 89432.
W.P.No.32453 of 2017
NM(CO)
SP(02/01/2018)

¶23

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

Pazhaniammal v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pazhaniammal v. The Revenue Divisional 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

Syed Thajudeen Vs The Collector

P.Subramanian, Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

A.Rajasekaran Vs The District Collector

M/s.Ethicare Laboratories Vs Tamil Nadu Medical Services

K.Kalidhass Vs The Principal Secretary/

K.Rathinam Vs The District collector