Dismissed

M.Damodharan, v. The Collector

Madras HC9 Apr 2018WP/8070/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the High Court directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to examine a pending appeal on merits and pass appropriate orders within six weeks, dismissing the plea for an inquiry into the delay without adjudicating the merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to consider the pending appeal on merits and pass appropriate orders within six weeks.

M.Damodharan, Vs The Collector — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 09.04.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA

¶5

W.P.No.8070 of 2018

¶6

M.Damodharan .. Petitioner

¶7

-vs-

¶8

The Collector
Kancheepuram District
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer
Chengalpattu
3. The Tahsildar
Chengalpattu
Kancheepuram District
4. R.Munuswamy Naidu
5. R.Vijayaragavan Naidu
6. R.Venkatesa Naidu .. Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the
second respondent to conduct enquiry on the proceeding of the
second respondent in Na.Ka.No.5018/13 Aa, dated 20.12.2013 and
O.Mu.No.5018/14 Aa, dated 12.01.2015 seeking cancellation of
Patta.

¶9

For Petitioner :: Mr.R.Karunagaran For Respondents :: Mr.D.Suriyanarayanan Additional Government Pleader for R1 to 3 ORDER This writ petition has been filed by Mr.M.Damodharan seeking a mandamus to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengalpattu, the second respondent herein to conduct enquiry on the pending appeal filed against the order passed by the third respondent, as the same has not been disposed of for quite a long time.

¶10

When the matter was taken up, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents 1 to 3 submitted that as

¶11

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

¶12

against the order passed by the third respondent dated 17.11.2014 rejecting the claim of the petitioner, an appeal has been filed by the petitioner and the same is pending before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengalpattu. Hence, if sufficient time is granted, the pending appeal would be considered on merits.

¶13

This Court, considering the limited prayer, without going to the merits, hereby directs the second respondent to consider the pending appeal of the petitioner on merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶14

s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-V)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
ss
To
1. The Collector
Kancheepuram District
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer
Chengalpattu
3. The Tahsildar
Chengalpattu
Kancheepuram District
+1 CC to Govt. Pleader sr 26268.

¶15

W.P.No.8070 of 2018

¶16

SP(23/04/2018)

¶17

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

M.Damodharan, v. The Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Damodharan, v. The 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

M.Jeyapal Vs The Inspector of Police

M.Malathi, Vs Bharat Pertroleum Coporation

K.K.Rajasirpy, Membership Vs The Deputy Registrar of

C.Chellappan Vs The Election Commissioner

K.Kandasamy Vs The Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable Tv

M.Malini, Vs The Commissioner