Disposed

Theresa Mary Latha, v. the Collector

Madras HC27 Aug 2020WP/16446/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition seeks a direction to propose respondents to dispose of a representation dated 25.11.2013 regarding the issuance of a patta. The Court directed the respondents to consider the representation and pass orders on merits within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to consider petitioner's representation dated 25.11.2013 and pass orders on merits within twelve weeks.

Theresa Mary Latha, Vs the Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 27.08.2020

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

W.P.No.16446 of 2014

¶6

Theresa Mary Latha ... Petitioner

¶7

¶8

The Collector,
Kancheepuram.
2. The Tahsildhar,
Sholinganallur Taluk,
Kancheepuram District. ... Respondents

¶9

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to dispose the representation given by the petitioner dated 25.11.2013. For Petitioner : Mr.K. Gajendiran For Respondents : Ms. A. Mathumathi, Special Govt. Pleader O R D E R

¶10

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 25.11.2013, seeking for issuance of patta.

¶11

It is the case of the petitioner that in spite of her representation dated 25.11.2013 for the issuance of patta, the 2^nd respondent has not passed any order sofar.

¶12

Ms. A. Mathumathi, learned Special Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents, submitted that the respondents may be directed to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 25.11.2013, on merits in accordance with law.

¶13

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, taking into consideration the limited prayer sought for in the Writ Petition, without expressing any

¶14

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

¶15

opinion with regard to the merits of the case, I direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.11.2013 and pass orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶16

With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶17

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1. The Collector,
Kancheepuram.
2. The Tahsildhar,
Sholinganallur Taluk,
Kancheepuram District.
+1cc to Government Pleader in Sr.28146
W.P.No.16446 of 2014
RV (CO)
RV (08/09/2020)

¶18

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

Theresa Mary Latha, v. the Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Theresa Mary Latha, v. the 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

Mrs.v.Rajamani Vs the Assistant Engineer

B.C.Vijayalakshmi, Vs Superintendent Engineer

N.Murugan Vs the Chief Administrate

Kancheepuram District Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep. by

E.Sampathkumari, Vs the District Collector

Mr.M.Pasupathy, Vs Mr.Ganesan