Disposed

Sebastian, v. the Commissioner of Land

Madras HC22 Jun 2018WP(MD)/13276/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the High Court directed the District Revenue Officer to complete pending proceedings regarding the cancellation of a patta within two months, ensuring an opportunity of personal hearing to all parties.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the second respondent to complete pending proceedings within two months and afford an opportunity of personal hearing to all parties before passing final orders.

Sebastian, Vs the Commissioner of Land — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 22.06.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.13276 of 2018

Sebastian

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Commissioner of Land Administration,

¶11

Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶12

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

¶13

3.Arulandu ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER : Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to dispose the proceedings in Na.Ka.B1/23400/2017 dated 23.03.2018 within a stipulated time that may be fixed by this Court.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Arun Jayatram

¶16

For R1 & R2 : Mr.S.Nagarajan Special Government Pleader

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

The petitioner seeks for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to dispose the proceedings in Na.Ka.B1/23400/2017 dated 23.03.2018 within a stipulated time that may be fixed by this Court.

¶19

2.The petitioner has challenged the cancelation of patta which was granted in his favour, before the first respondent. After hearing the petitioner, the first respondent has remanded the matter back to the second respondent for fresh consideration. Even though notice dated 23.03.2018 was issued for enquiry, there was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ no progress. In view of the urgency to use the pathway to run the Car during the village festival, the petitioner seeks early

¶20

¶21

disposal of the proceedings pending before the second respondent.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and considered the materials available on record.

¶23

It is clear that the matter is remanded back by the first respondent to the second respondent and in view of the remand order it can be inferred that all the parties have been served and now enquiry should be conducted after affording opportunity to all the parties.

¶24

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, a direction is issued to the second respondent to complete the proceedings pending before him within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a coy of this order. The second respondent is further directed to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to all the parties before passing final orders.

¶25

With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(T&P)

¶28

/True Copy/

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶30

To:

¶31

1.The Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶32

2.The District Revenue Officer,

¶33

Sivagangai District,

¶34

Sivagangai.

¶35

- 1 cc TO Mr.P.Arun Jayatram , Advocate in SR No. 69798

¶36

¶37

AE/SKN RSK/SAR1/05.07.2018/2P/4C

¶38

W.P.(MD) No.13276 of 2018 22.06.2018

¶39

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

Sebastian, v. the Commissioner of Land

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sebastian, v. the Commissioner of Land

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

Saraswathi, Vs the District Collector

A.Ramakrishnan Vs the Shipping Master

Manickanathan Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

N.Mareeswari, Vs State of Tamil Nadu

P.Alexander, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

P.Siva Kumar, Vs the Sub Registrar