Disposed

A.Thandapani, v. the District Collector

Madras HC26 Apr 2017WP(MD)/6412/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, in a writ petition under Article 226, directed the Tahsildar to survey the petitioner's land in Dindigul, demarcate its boundaries, and complete the exercise within eight weeks after giving notice to interested parties.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent to survey the property by demarcating boundaries and complete the exercise within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

A.Thandapani, Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED 26.04.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN

¶5

W.P(MD)No.6412 of 2017

A.Thandapani

..Petitioner

1.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul. 2.The Tahsildar, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District. 3.The Surveyor, Tahsildar Office, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District. ..Respondents.

¶10

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to survey the Petitioner's land in S.No.601/1, situate at Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District and issue joint patta, on the basis of the representation of the Petitioner dated 31.3.2017.

¶11

For Petitioner :M/s.C.Maria Chellaiah Prabhu For Respondents :Mr.M.Alagathevan Special Govt.Pleader

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The Petitioner has approached this Court seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to survey the Petitioner's land in S.No.601/1, situate at Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District and issue joint patta, on the basis of the representation of the Petitioner, dated 31.03.2017.

¶14

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶15

3.The case of the Petitioner is that the Petitioner along with https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ one Renuka purchased a land, measuring an extent 82 ¾ cents in S.No.601/1, situated at Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶16

¶17

Eversince the purchase, they have been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property. The Petitioner, in the circumstances, approached the respondents for survey of the land by fixing the boundaries and issue a joint batta in their favour. It appears that the Petitioner also paid proper fees for carrying out the survey and fixing the boundaries, on 2.2.2017. Even thereafter, no action was forthcoming from the third respondent. Therefore the Petitioner is before this Court for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus for the relief stated supra.

¶18

4.Considering the submissions made on behalf of the Petitioner and on behalf of the respondents, this Court directs the second respondent to survey the subject property of the Petitioner by demarcating the boundaries, after giving notice to interested parties, if any. This exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶19

5.With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶20

Sd/Assistant Registrar(RTI)

¶21

/True Copy/

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

¶24

¶25

W.P(MD)No.6412 of 2017 26.04.2017

¶26

VSN

¶27

kk/SV-MMS-SAR3-28.04.2017-2P-5C

¶28

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

A.Thandapani, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Thandapani, 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P. Sellappan, Vs the District Revenue Officer

P.Chidambaram, Vs State of Tamil Nadu

T.Rajan Vs the District Revenue Officer

M.Vinoth, S/O Murugan, Vs the Passport Officer

S.Paramasivam, Vs the Assistant General Manager

Suriya Prakash Vs the Regional Passport Officer