Disposed

A.Palanisamy v. The District Collector

Madras HC11 Nov 2020WP/905/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two Writ Petitions filed under Article 226, the High Court directed the Tahsildar (3rd respondent) to consider the petitioners' representation regarding issuance of patta/assignment for specific property and pass an order on merits within eight weeks, disposing of the petitions without deciding on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the petitioners' representation and pass orders on merits within eight weeks.

A.Palanisamy Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 11.11.2020

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

W.P.Nos.905 & 906 of 2017 and W.M.P. Nos 898 & 899 of 2017

¶6

A. Palanisamy ... Petitioner in W.P.No.905/2017
P. Rajendran ... Petitioner in W.P.No.906/2017
v.
1. The District Collector,
Villupuram,
Villupuram District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Kallakuruchi,
Villupuram District.
3. The Tahsildar,
Chinna Salem,
Villupuram District.
4. Block Development Officer,
Kalvarayanmalai Panchayat Union,
Vellimalai,
Villupuram District. ... Respondents in both WPs

¶7

W.P.No.905/2017 :-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for issuing patta/assignment for the property situated in Survey No.51/2 measuring an extent of 0.84.5 Ares Mel Vanniyur Village in favour of the petitioner in view of the continuous enjoyment and possession of the property.

¶8

W.P.No.906/2017 :-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for issuing patta/assignment for the property situated in Survey No.51/2 measuring an extent of 0.84.5 Ares Mel Vanniyur Village in favour of the petitioner in view of the continuous enjoyment and possession of the property.

¶9

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

¶10

For Petitioners : Mr. Hemnath

¶11

for Mr. S.Sivakumar

¶12

For Respondents: Ms. A. Madhumathi, Special Government Pleader

¶13

COMMON ORDER

¶14

The petitioners have filed the above Writ Petitions to issue Writs of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for issuing patta/assignment for the properties situated in Survey No.51/2 measuring an extent of 0.84.5 Ares each in Mel Vanniyur Village in favour of the petitioners in view of the continuous enjoyment and possession of the property.

¶15

Mr. Hemnath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that though the petitioners have given their representation to the 3^rd respondent as early as on 14.11.2016, the 3^rd respondent has not passed any order sofar.

¶16

Ms. A. Madhumathi, learned Special Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents submitted that the land in question belongs to a temple and therefore, suitable orders would be passed by the 3^rd respondent in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks.

¶17

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, taking into consideration the limited prayer sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioners, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, I direct the 3^rd respondent to consider the petitioners' representation dated 14.11.2016 and pass orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶18

With these observations, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶19

True Copy

¶20

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶21

¶22

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

¶23

¶24

The District Collector,
Villupuram,
Villupuram District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Kallakuruchi,
Villupuram District.
3. The Tahsildar,
Chinna Salem,
Villupuram District.
4. Block Development Officer,
Kalvarayanmalai Panchayat Union,
Vellimalai,
Villupuram District.
+1 CC to Mr.S. Sivakumar, Advocate sr 36828
+1 CC to The Government Pleader sr 36757.
W.P.Nos.905 & 906 of 2017 and
W.M.P. Nos 898 & 899 of 2017
UM(CO)
SP(04/12/2020)

¶25

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

A.Palanisamy v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Palanisamy 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

N.K.Subramaniam, Vs the Sub Collector

Tmt.R. Ranjani Vs the District Revenue Officer

E.Raja, S/O. Elumalai, Vs The Inspector General of

A.C.Sivakumar, Vs The Chairman, (Superintending

T. Thangapushpam Vs The Tahsildar

Mrs.Alamelu, Vs The Chief Controlling