Dismissed

Tmt.Alagammai v. the Special Commissioner

Madras HC19 Jul 2019WP/21381/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226 challenging the rejection of a stay petition, the Court was informed that the revisional power of the Special Commissioner was taken away by a Government Order. The Court held that no question survives for consideration. The petition was dismissed with liberty to approach the Civil Court.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed; liberty granted to approach the competent Civil Court.

Tmt.Alagammai Vs the Special Commissioner — Property and Title | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 19.07.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶5

W.P.No.21381 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008

¶6

Alagammai ..Petitioner

¶7

¶8

1. The Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.

¶9

The District Revenue Officer, Pudukottai.

¶10

The Revenue Divisional Officer/Sub Collector, Pudukottail, Pudukottai District.

¶11

The Tahsildar, Illuppur, Pudukkottai District.

¶12

Chinnappa Pallavarayar 6. Chinnayya Pallavarayar 7. Shanmugham Pallavarayar 8. Nataraja Pallavarayar 9. Narmada 10. Vaijayanthi ..Respondents

¶13

Prayer:- The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorari to call for the record pertaining to order passed by the first respondent in K3/3423/2008 by the Special Commissioner & Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai 5 dated 05.03.2008 and to quash the same.

¶14

For Petitioner : M/s.Dalit Tiger C.Ponnusamy

¶15

For Respondents : Mr.A.N.Thangavelu,

¶16

Spl.G.P., for RR1 to 4 Mr.T.M.Hariharan, RR5 to 7 & 10 No Appearance, for RR8 & 9 - - - -

¶17

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

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Heard the learned counsels appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶20

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order of the first respondent, whereby the stay petition filed by the petitioner in Revision Petition was rejected.

¶21

The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 would state that the revisional power granted to the first respondent has been taken away by issuing a G.O.Ms.409, Revenue SSI (2) Department, dated 02.07.2008 and the remedy is available only before the Civil Court.

¶22

In the light of the above submissions, nothing survives for consideration in this Writ Petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar pvs To 1. The Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005. 2. The District Revenue Officer, Pudukottai. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer/Sub Collector, Pudukottai ,Pudukottai District. 4. The Tahsildar, Illuppur, Pudukkottai District. +1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.No. 62348 W.P.No.21381 of 2008 A.SK(28/08/2019) A.SK(10/09/2019)

¶23

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

Tmt.Alagammai v. the Special Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tmt.Alagammai v. the Special Commissioner

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

P.G.Jayapathi, Correspondent Vs the Manager

Tmt.S.Rathinam Aged 45 Yrs, Vs the Secretary to Government

C.Ramachandran Vs the District Collector

George Vs the State of Tamilnadu

S.Vanniaraj Vs Secretary to Government

Mr.G.Boopathy Vs the Special Commissioner and