Disposed

K.Vijayalakshmi, v. the Tahsildar

Madras HC13 Aug 2020WP/6080/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner sought a direction to the Tahsildar to consider her representation dated 24.01.2014 for issuance of patta regarding purchased lands. The Court directed the respondent to consider the merits and pass an order within twelve weeks without expressing any opinion on the case's merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders on merits within twelve weeks.

K.Vijayalakshmi, Vs the Tahsildar — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 13.08.2020

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

W.P.No.6080 of 2014

K.Vijayalakshmi

...Petitioner

The Tahsildar, Polur Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District. ...Respondent Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent herein to forthwith consider and pass orders on the representation dated 24.01.2014 for issuance of patta to the petitioner in respect of the lands purchased by her in S.No.215/13, extent 0.24 cents, S.No.215/1A : extent 0.24cents, S.No.215/15 : extent 0.03 cents, S.No.215/9: extent 0.46 cents, S.No.246/1 : extent 0.26 cents, S.No.246/2 : extent 0.26 cents, S.No.246/3 : extent 0.32 cents, S.No.247/6A : extent 0.16 cents, S.No.247/8A : extent 0.37 cents, S.No.247/8B1 : extent 0.01 cents, S.No.247/6A : extent 0.17 cents, S.No.247/7A : extent 0.33 cents, S.No.246/1 : extent 0.26 cents, S.No.246/3 : extent 0.30 cents, S.No.246/8 : extent 0.46 cents, S.No.247/6A : extent 0.33 cents, S.No.247/4 : extent 0.95 cents, S.No.247/3 : extent 0.04 cents and S.No.215/13 : extent 0.24 cents (totally 5.43 acres) situate at Peranambakkam Village, Polur Taluk, Tiruvannamalai district pursuant to the respective registered sale deeds.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr. A. Bharathi For Respondent : Ms. A. Mathumathi, Special Govt. Pleader O R D E R

¶11

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation dated 24.01.2014 for issuance of patta to the petitioner in respect of the lands purchased by her in S.No.215/13, extent 0.24 cents, S.No.215/1A : extent

¶12

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

¶13

0.24cents, S.No.215/15 : extent 0.03 cents, S.No.215/9 : extent 0.46 cents, S.No.246/1 : extent 0.26 cents, S.No.246/2 : extent 0.26 cents, S.No.246/3 : extent 0.32 cents, S.No.247/6A : extent 0.16 cents, S.No.247/8A : extent 0.37 cents, S.No.247/8B1 : extent 0.01 cents, S.No.247/6A : extent 0.17 cents, S.No.247/7A : extent 0.33 cents, S.No.246/1 : extent 0.26 cents, S.No.246/3 : extent 0.30 cents, S.No.246/8 : extent 0.46 cents, S.No.247/6A : extent 0.33 cents, S.No.247/4 : extent 0.95 cents, S.No.247/3 : extent 0.04 cents and S.No.215/13 : extent 0.24 cents (totally 5.43 acres) situate at Peranambakkam Village, Polur Taluk, Tiruvannamalai district pursuant to the respective registered sale deeds.

¶14

It is the case of the petitioner that a request for issuance of patta in respect of the above referred lands by the representation dated 24.01.2014 has not yet been considered by the respondent.

¶15

Ms.A.Mathumathi, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submitted that the respondent may be directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.01.2014 and pass orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame.

¶16

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned Special Government Pleader and also taking into consideration the averments stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, I direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.01.2014 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.

¶17

With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

-s/d-

Assistant Registrar

True Copy

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶22

¶23

The Tahsildar, Polur Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶24

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

¶25

W.P.No.6080 of 2014

¶26

+1cc to the Government Pleader in SR.26734/20

¶27

VS(CO)
RV(18/09/2020)

¶28

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

K.Vijayalakshmi, v. the Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Vijayalakshmi, v. the Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Inbaraj, Vs the Government of Tamil Nadu

Jayalakshmi Ammal, Residing Vs the Tamil Nadu Electricity

S.Palanimuthu Vs the District Collector

Kirankumari Vs the Commissioner and Secretary

S.Govarthanan Vs the Commissioner

M.Kajamohideen, S/O.Mohammed Vs the District Collector