Petitioner sought mandamus to compel mutation of assigned land. Court directed the Tahsildar to consider the petitioner's representation on merits expeditiously, within eight weeks, without deciding the merits.
Writ Petition disposed; directed second respondent to consider petitioner's representation within eight weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED 08.06.2017 CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
W.P(MD)No.10658 of 2017
Tmt.Sekaram ..Petitioner
Vs
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents i.e., The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai and the Tahsildar, Illayangudi to carry out the mutations in the village and Taluk accounts as per the orders of assignment issued in HSDA No.44/1415, dated 24.5.2006 of the Tahsiuldar, Illayangudi in respect of S.No.240/5 of Karaikulam Village, within the specified time frame fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : M/s.S.Visvalingam
For Respondents : Mr.M.Alagathevan Spl.Govt.Pleader
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents i.e., The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai and the Tahsildar, Illayangudi to carry out the mutations in the village and Taluk accounts as per the orders of assignment issued in HSDA No.44/1415, dated 24.5.2006 of the Tahsiuldar, Illayangudi in respect of S.No.240/5 of Karaikulam Village, within the specified time frame fixed by this Court.
2.Mr.M.Alagathevan, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.By consent of both parties, the main Writ Petition is taken up for disposal, at the admission stage itself.
2
4.The case of the Petitioner is that she was assigned with three cents of land in S.No.240/5 in Karaikulam Village as per the HSDA No.44/1415, dated 24.5.2006. Since then, she has been in possession and enjoyment of the property.
5.The grievance of the Petitioner is that though the land was assigned in the year 2006, however, so far mutation has not taken place in the Village and Taluk accounts and even now, it is shown as ''Natham Vacant Site''. Hence the Petitioner presented a petition on 25.3.2017 to the second respondent. Since no action was taken so far, the present Writ Petition is filed for the relief stated supra.
6.Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, without going into the merits of the case, this Court directs the second respondent to consider the representation/Petition of the Petitioner, dated 25.03.2017 on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders on the same, after giving notice to the Petitioner and other interested parties, if any, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order
7.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(Records)
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
Sivagangai District.
VSN
VB/KKR/SAR4/16/06/2017/2P/5C
W.P(MD)No.10658 of 2017 08.06.2017
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Revenue Divisional Officer and Tahsildar are directed to consider the petitioner's representation for mutation within eight weeks.
Tmt.Sekaram
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai Division, Sivagangai
The Tahsildar, Illayangudi Taluk, Illayangudi, Sivagangai District
K.Kalyanasundaram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
