Disposed

Hussaina Bee v. The Collector

Madras HC13 Feb 2018WP/3060/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition filed under Article 226 sought a mandamus directing respondent authorities to issue Patta for a property. The court directed the second respondent to consider the petitioners' representations on merits within twelve weeks without expressing a view on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent to consider representations and decide on merits within twelve weeks.

Hussaina Bee Vs The Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 13.02.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU

¶5

Writ Petition No.3060 of 2018

¶6

Hussaina Bee
2. Mumtaz .. Petitioners
versus
1. The Collector
Chennai District
Singaravellar Maligai
Balaji Salai, Chennai-600 001.

¶7

The Tahsildar
Fort-Tondiarpet Taluk
Chennai-600 003.
3. The Village Administrative Officer
VAO Tondairpet
Chennai-600 003. .. Respondents

¶8

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to issue Patta to the petitioners.

¶9

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY

¶10

All piece and parcel of land and building situated at Door No.5/2, Parthasarathy 6th Street, Old Washermenpet, Chennai-600 021, comprised in R.S.No.1970/2016 for an extent of 1080 sq.ft and thereabouts.

¶11

Mr.D.Suriyanarayanan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶12

Heard both sides.

¶13

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

¶14

The petitioners seek for mandamus directing the respondents to issue Patta in their favour in respect of the subject matter property, based on their representations dated 13.06.2017 and 18.09.2017.

¶15

The grievance of the petitioners before this Court is that the said representations have not been considered so far. This Court, at this stage, is not expressing any view on the merits of the claim made by the petitioners, as it is for the second 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 second respondent to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 13.06.2017 and 18.09.2017 and pass orders on the same on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing rival claimants, if any. Such exercise shall be done by the second 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 mk To 1. The Collector Chennai District Singaravellar Maligai Balaji Salai, Chennai-600 001. 2. The Tahsildar Fort-Tondiarpet Taluk Chennai-600 003. 3. The Village Administrative Officer VAO Tondairpet Chennai-600 003. +3cc to M/s.J.Arul Prakasam, Advocate Sr.No.10898 +1cc to Government Pleader SR.No.11310 GMR(CO) sm:26.2.2018

¶17

W.P.No.3060 of 2018

¶18

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

Hussaina Bee v. The Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hussaina Bee v. The 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

Kannusamy, Vs The District Collector

P.Bakthavatchalam, Vs The District Collector

K.Kuppan, Vs The Executive Engineer

S.Poongavanam, Vs The District Collector

M/s.Savitha Devi Vs The Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies

J.Krishnakumar, Vs The Sub Collector