Disposed

Habeeb v. the Disrtict Collector

Madras HC14 Mar 2017WP(MD)/3857/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this rule 3 proceedings, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a petition filed under Article 226 seeking rectification of revenue records and issuance of patta. The Court held that the petitioner could file an appeal before the District Revenue Officer as per G.O.No.385, 2004. Accordingly, the writ petition was closed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner was given liberty to file an appeal before the appropriate authority.

Habeeb Vs the Disrtict Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.03.2017 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN W.P.(MD)No.3857 of 2017

Habeeb

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶8

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶9

3.The Tahsildar, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶10

... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents rectify the defects in UDR and other revenue records in respect of Survey No.139/1A1 measuring 0.09.5 ares in patta No.731 situated at Rajagambeeram Village, Rajagambeeram Group, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District and to issue patta to the petitioner and conduct enquiry based on the petitioner's representation dated 19.12.2016 and 18.01.2017.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Madhava Govindan For Respondents : Mr.D.Muruganantham,Spl.GP

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

The petitioner seeks for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents rectify the defects in UDR and other revenue records in respect of Survey No.139/1A1 measuring 0.09.5 ares in patta No.731 situated at Rajagambeeram Village, Rajagambeeram Group, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District and to issue patta to the petitioner and conduct enquiry based on the petitioner's representation dated 19.12.2016 and 18.01.2017.

¶15

2.Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has a right to file an appeal before the District Revenue Officer as per G.O.No.385, dated 17.08.2004.

¶16

3.In view of the said submission made by the learned Special https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, the Writ petition is closed, giving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before

¶17

¶18

the appropriate authority. No costs.

¶19

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-III)

¶20

/True copy/

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

¶23

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶24

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶25

3.The Tahsildar, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶26

+1 CC to THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR No. 14711

¶27

+1 CC to M/s.N.MADHAVAGOVINDAN, Advocate, SR No. 14931 NBJ

¶28

PSM/SV-MMS/SAR3/17.04.2017/2P/6C

¶29

W.P.(MD)No.3857 of 2017

¶30

14.03.2017

¶31

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

Habeeb v. the Disrtict Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Habeeb v. the Disrtict 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.Merryston David Scanny Vs the Government of India

The Headmistress Vs the Tamil Nadu Information

M. Merryston David Scanny, Vs the Government of

M. Ganesan Vs the Commissioner

Sheik Mohammed, Vs the Superintendent of

Sankar Ambedkar, S/O.Azhagar Vs the Chief Information