Disposed

R.Nagendra Babu, v. The District Collector

Madras HC15 Dec 2017WP/32670/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking mandamus against the 2nd respondent to expedite consideration of a representation for name correction in Patta No.534. Court directed the respondent to decide on merits within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direct to consider petitioner's representation for name correction in Patta No.534 and pass orders on merits within eight weeks.

R.Nagendra Babu, Vs The District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 15.12.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU

¶5

Writ Petition No.32670 of 2017

¶6

R.Nagendra Babu .. Petitioner
Vs.
1. The District Collector,
Kancheepuram District.
2. The Tahsildar,
Cheyyar Taluk,
Kancheepuram District.
3. The Revenue Inspector,
Kadappakkam Sub-Division,
Cheyyur Taluk,
Kancheepuram District.
4. The Village Administrative Officer,
No.62, Mudaliar Kuppam Village,
Cheyyur Taluk,
Kancheeuram District. .. Respondents
PRAYER: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus
directing the 2 nd respondent to consider and pass order on the
petitioner's representation dated 25.03.2015 seeking to carryout
the correction in Patta No.534, 'RAJENDRA BABU” instead of his
name 'NAGENDRA BABU” within the time frame fixed by this Court.

¶7

For Petitioner : Mr.V.R.Kamalanathan For Respondents : Mr.R.Govindasamy, Special Government Pleader O R D E R

¶8

Mr.R.Govindasamy, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶9

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

¶10

2. Heard both sides.

¶11

The petitioner seeks for a Mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass order on the petitioner's representation dated 25.03.2015, wherein and whereby, he has sought for correction of his name as 'NAGENDRA BABU' instead of 'RAJENDRA BABU” in Patta No.534 in respect of his agricultural land.

¶12

The grievance of the petitioner is that the said request has not been considered so far. At this stage, this Court is not expressing any view on the merits of the claim made by the petitioner as it is for the 2^nd respondent to consider and decide the same on merits and in accordance with law. Therefore, this Court directs the 2^nd respondent to consider the application of the petitioner dated 25.03.2015 and pass orders on the same on merits and in accordance with law. Such exercise shall be done by the 2^nd respondent within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Sd/Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vsi To 1. The District Collector, Kancheepuram District. 2. The Tahsildar, Cheyyar Taluk, Kancheepuram District. 3. The Revenue Inspector, Kadappakkam Sub-Division, Cheyyur Taluk, Kancheepuram District. 4. The Village Administrative Officer, No.62, Mudaliar Kuppam Village, Cheyyur Taluk, Kancheeuram District.

¶13

+1cc to Mr.V.R.Kamalanathan, Advocate, S.R.No.89723 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.89925

¶14

W.P.No.32670 of 2017

¶15

RRK(02/01/2018)

¶16

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

R.Nagendra Babu, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Nagendra Babu, 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

M/s.Sivaraman Indane Gas Vs The Union of India

K. Dhanraj Vs The District Collector

D.Jayalakshmi, Vs The Secretary to Government

A.S.Farhana Vs The Sub Registrar

Thirupathi Nehru Vs The Superintendent of

R.Bharathi Vs The District Collector