Dismissed

A. Arunachalam v. The District Collector

Madras HC17 Sept 2020WP/15053/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a mandamus for the Tahsildar to consider a representation for cancelling a patta. The Court held that the statutory remedy under Section 12 of the Patta Pass Book Act is available and the writ prayer was denied.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; petitioner directed to file an appeal under Section 12 of the Patta Pass Book Act.

A. Arunachalam Vs The District Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 17.09.2020

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

W.P.No.15053 of 2016

¶6

A.Arunachalam ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Perambalur, Perambalur District.

¶9

2.The Tahsildar, Veppanthattai Taluk, Perambalur District. ... Respondents

¶10

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 14.09.2015 and to pass appropriate orders on his representation within a time frame.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Ilamurugu

¶12

For Respondents: Ms.A.Madhumathi,

¶13

Special Government Pleader

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent to consider his representation dated 14.09.2015 seeking for cancellation of the patta issued in favour of one Ramani.

¶16

2.On a perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the petition, it could be seen that the petitioner has given his representation to the 2^nd respondent seeking for cancellation of the patta issued in favour of one Ramani, however, the said Ramani has not been made as a respondent in the Writ Petition. Further, the remedy open to the petitioner to get the patta cancelled is only under Section 12 of the Patta Pass Book Act and not by the 2^nd respondent, who is the original authority, who had issued the patta.

¶17

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

¶18

3.Ms.A.Madhumathi, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has to file an appeal under Section 12 of the Patta Pass Book Act and the prayer sought for in the Writ Petition cannot be granted.

¶19

4.In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the Writ Petition is disposed of and it is open to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 12 of the Patta Pass Book Act challenging the issuance of patta in favour of one Ramani, in accordance with law. No costs.

¶20

s/dAssistant Registrar

¶21

True Copy

¶22

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶23

va To

¶24

1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Perambalur, Perambalur District.

¶25

2.The Tahsildar, Veppanthattai Taluk, Perambalur District.

¶26

+1 CC to Mr.G.Ilamurugu, Advocate sr 30333. +1 CC to Govt. Pleader sr 30493.

¶27

W.P.No.15053 of 2016

¶28

VSNII(CO) SP(19/10/2020)

¶29

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

A. Arunachalam v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A. Arunachalam v. The District 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

Sri Kumarappa Seva Sangam, Vs Kadhi and Village Industries

N.Mathivanan Vs the District Collector

M.Thandavarayan, Vs The Inspector General of

Kalaiselvi, Vs The Inspector General of

Muniyamma, Vs The Inspector General of

C.Raju, Vs Tamil nadu Generation and