Disposed

Rais Jahan Zawahir, v. the District Collector

Madras HC21 Jun 2017WP(MD)/10890/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a survey correction for disputed land extent. The court directed the petitioner to submit a fresh representation with fee receipts within two weeks, upon which the respondents must act on merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to file fresh representation with fee proof within two weeks so Tahsildar may act on merits within six weeks.

Rais Jahan Zawahir, Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 21.06.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶5

W.P.(MD)No.10890 of 2017

¶6

Rais Jahan Zawahir rep. by her Power of Attorney

¶7

M.Arulsamy, Chennai-54. : Petitioner

¶8

-vs-

¶9

1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.

¶10

2.The Commissioner,

¶11

Ramanathapuram Municipality, Ramanathapuram.

¶12

3.The Tahsildar,

¶13

Ramanathapuram Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

¶14

4.The Town Surveyor, Ramanathapuram Municipality, Ramanathapuram. : Respondents

¶15

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to consider the notice-cum-representation, dated 27.04.2017 sent by the counsel for the petitioner and consequently, survey the property in Survey No.32/31, Sivagnanapuram Hamlet of Ramanathapuram Village, Ramanathapuram Taluk, Ramanathapuram District, as per the sale deed, dated 20.02.1961 (Document No.437 of 1961) to correct the extent in the town survey records.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Barathan

¶17

For Respondents : Mr.A.Muthukaruppan

¶18

Additional Government Pleader

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This writ petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to consider the notice-cumrepresentation, dated 27.04.2017 sent by the counsel for the petitioner and consequently survey the property in Survey No.32/31, Sivagnanapuram Hamlet of Ramanathapuram Village, Ramanathapuram Taluk, Ramanathapuram District, as per the sale https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ deed, dated 20.02.1961 (Document No.437 of 1961) and to correct the extent in the town survey records.

¶21

¶22

2.According to the petitioner, the property comprised in Survey Nos.31/31 to an extent of 1 Acres 75 cents was purchased through a registered sale deed, dated 20.02.1961 and when the said property was surveyed during the town survey, the respondents had mistakenly mentioned the extent and hence, the petitioner gave a representation to survey the property as per the sale deed and to correct the mistake in the revenue records. Sine no favourable order was passed, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶23

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

¶24

4.The learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that before filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has not submitted proper representation to the 3^rd respondent and if a fresh representation is given along with the proof for payment of necessary fees, the 3^rd respondent would consider the representation of the petitioner.

¶25

5.Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for in this writ petition and also considering the submission made by the learned Additional Government Pleader, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to give a fresh representation to the 3^rd respondent, enclosing this order copy and other necessary documents within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the order copy and shall produce the receipt for payment of necessary fees to survey land. On such compliance by the petitioner, the 3^rd respondent shall consider the representation of the petitioner and take action on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks therefrom. No costs.

¶26

Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶27

/True copy/

¶28

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶29

To,

¶30

1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.

¶31

2.The Commissioner, Ramanathapuram Municipality, Ramanathapuram.

¶32

3.The Tahsildar,

¶33

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Ramanathapuram Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

¶34

¶35

4.The Town Surveyor, Ramanathapuram Municipality, Ramanathapuram.

¶36

+1cc to Mr.T.R.Jeyapalan,Advocate,SR.61592

¶37

W.P.(MD)No.10890 of 2017 21.06.2017

¶38

ER KK/SV/SAR1/10.07.2017/3P-6C/

¶39

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

Rais Jahan Zawahir, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rais Jahan Zawahir, 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

R.Josephin Rose, Vs the Chairman, Central Board

S.Sarasu, W/O.Singamuthu Vs the Deputy Inspector General

Ibrahim Sha Vs the District Revenue Officer

T.Maruthamuthu, Vs the Arbitrator

Mara Tamilar Senai Vs the Principal Secretary

Sun Set Bazar Vyabarial Nala Vs the Union of India