Disposed

A.Chakkarabani, v. The Sub Collector/

Madras HC20 Dec 2017WP/33217/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition filed under Article 226, the Court directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to decide the petitioner's appeal on merits within twelve weeks, following notice to all parties, without adjudicating the substantive claim regarding Patta cancellation.

What did the court decide?

Directed the first respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's appeal on merits within twelve weeks.

A.Chakkarabani, Vs The Sub Collector/ — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 20.12.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. RAVICHANDRABAABU

¶5

W.P.No.33217 of 2017

¶6

A.Chakkarabani
S/o.Late Anavaradhan ... Petitioner
versus
1. The Sub Collector / Revenue Divisional Officer
Madhurantakam, Kancheepuram District.
2. The Tahsildar
Cheyyur Taluk, Cheyyur.
3. Rajendran
S/o.Manickam
4. Palani
S/o.Kuppusamy
5. Muthu
S/o.Chinna Kannu
6. Perumal
S/o.Kannan ...Respondents

¶7

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to take appropriate action and pass final orders in the petitioner's Appeal dated 24.10.2017 within time limit stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Subburaj

¶9

For Respondents: Mr.R.Govindasamy

¶10

Special Government Pleader for R1 & R2 O R D E R

¶11

Mr.R.Govindasamy, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2. Since this writ petition is disposed of without affecting the interest of the respondents 3 to 6, notice to those respondents is dispensed with.

¶12

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

¶13

The petitioner seeks for a Mandamus directing the first respondent to pass orders on the appeal filed by the petitioner dated 24.10.2017, arising out of Patta proceedings.

¶14

According to the petitioner, the subject matter Patta granted in favour of the petitioner's father was subsequently, cancelled and granted in the name of these private respondents. Therefore, the petitioner filed the above appeal before the first respondent.

¶15

This Court, at this stage, is not expressing any view on the merits of the claim made by the petitioner, as it is for the first respondent to consider and decide the same on merits and in accordance with law. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, only by directing the first respondent to consider and pass orders on the appeal filed by the petitioner on merits and in accordance with law, after giving notice to the petitioner as well as to the respondents 3 to 6 and other interested persons, if any. Such exercise shall be done by the first respondent within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶16

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1. The Sub Collector / Revenue Divisional Officer
Madhurantakam, Kancheepuram District.
2. The Tahsildar
Cheyyur Taluk, Cheyyur.
+1cc to Government Pleader SR.No.91459
W.P.No.33217 of 2017
SV(CO)
sm:10.1.2018

¶17

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

A.Chakkarabani, v. The Sub Collector/

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Chakkarabani, v. The Sub Collector/

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Nagendra Babu, Vs The Sub collector

Lavanya Vs The District Collector

R.Balasundaram Vs The Commissioner

G.Murali, Vs The Sub Collector

T.Loganathan, Vs The Inspector of Police

Kanagaraj Vs The Thasildar