The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a petitioner seeking a writ of Mandamus for the grant of patta. The court held the petition inadmissible because the petition did not specify the survey number and noted that patta cannot be issued for a water body.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.07.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.No.9665 of 2020
and
WMP.No.11783 of 2020
Mr.K.Ezhilarasan, S/o.Mr.Kasi Pillai,
No.19, Kilathur Village,
Thennagaram Post,
Tiruvannamalai Taluk,
Tiruvannamalai District 606 802. ...Petitioner
Vs.
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to pass an order on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 24.10.2016 for grant of patta to the property in his name and pass orders.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Kumar Rajan
For respondents : Mr.E.Balamurugan, Special Government Pleader.
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed for the issuance of writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to dispose of the representation made by the petitioner on 24.10.2016.
2.In the entire affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the writ petition, there is not even a mention as to which survey number the petitioner is seeking for patta. Curiously, the affidavit is silent about this material fact. It is seen from the representation that the petitioner is seeking for patta for Survey No.127/1.
3.Mr.E.Balamurugan, the learned Special Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that the survey number for which the petitioner is seeking for a patta has been classified as water body and the petitioner is already owning a land in his name and therefore the petitioner is not entitled for patta.
4.This Court does not find any merits in the present petition. This petition has to be rejected on the simple ground that it does not even state for which survey number the petitioner is seeking for issuance of patta. In any case, there is no question of issuance of patta for a water body.
5.Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rm
To
1.The District Collector,
2.The Tahsildhar,
Tiruvannamalai Taluk,
Tiruvannamalai District-606 604.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Tiruvannamalai Sub-Division,
Tiruvannamalai-606 604.
4.The Village Administrative Officer,
Meppathurai Group,
Tiruvannamalai Taluk,
Tiruvannamalai-606802.
5.The Panchayat President,
Meppathurai Panchayat,
Tiruvannamalai Taluk,
Tiruvannamalai District.
+1cc to Mr.N.Kumar Rajan, Advocate, S.R.No.25430
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.25408
W.P.No.9665 of 2020
MR(CO)
KKV/19/08/2020
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for lack of material facts regarding the survey number sought for patta.
Whether patta can be granted for land classified as a water body.
K.Ezhilarasan
The District Collector
The Tahsildhar
The Revenue Divisional Officer
The Village Administrative Officer
The Panchayat President
N.Anand Venkatesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
