The Madras High Court directed the District Collector to consider the petitioner's representation for patta transfer of land within two months, providing an opportunity to interested parties before taking final action.
Direction to respondents to consider petitioner's representation dated 22.02.2017 on merits within two months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.06.2018 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ W.P.(MD) No.13029 of 2018
Karaunanithi
... Petitioner
vs.
Trichy.
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to transfer the patta to the property comprised in S.F.No.404/1A, Nadupatti Village, Manaparai Taluk, Trichy District in favour of the legal heirs of the petitioner's mother Nagammaniammal by considering the petitioner's representation dated 22.02.2017.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian
For Respondents : Mr.N.Shanmugaselvam
Additional Government Pleader
O R D E R
Mr.N.Shanmugaselvam, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that his representation dated 22.02.2017, seeking patta for his land has not been considered by the respondents till date. Therefore, he has filed the present writ petition.
4. This Court has not expressed any of its view with regard to the merits of the representation made by the petitioner. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made, the respondents are duty bound to consider the same in one way or the other. Non-consideration of the same would amount to dereliction of ordinary duties of their office and as such, this Court would be justified in invoking its powers conferred under https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct them to consider
the petitioner's representation within a stipulated time.
2
5. In view of the limited prayer sought for in this writ
petition, there shall be a direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 22.02.2017 on its own merits and take further action in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Such an exercise shall be done after giving due opportunity to the petitioner and to all the necessary parties who may be interested in the subject land.
6. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed
of. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-I)
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To:
Trichy District.
+1cc to Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian, Advocate in SR. No.69276 cm
MK/SKN RSK/SAR 3/02.07.2018/2P/4C
W.P.(MD) No.13029 of 2018 20.06.2018
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent authorities are liable for dereliction of duty in not considering the petitioner's representation regarding patta transfer for a periodical time.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Karaunanithi
The District Collector, Trichy
The Tahsildar, Manaparai, Trichy District
M.Govindaraj
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
