Remanded

D.Balasundaram v. The District Revenue Officer

Madras HC8 Oct 2021WP/21840/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed seeking direction to revenue authorities to process a representation for transferring a patta from the petitioner's father to the petitioner for specific survey numbers. The court directed authorities to consider the request and pass orders within four months.

What did the court decide?

Defense directed to consider the representation, follow due process including hearing if necessary, and pass orders on merits within four months.

D.Balasundaram Vs The District Revenue Officer — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 08.10.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICEV.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

¶5

 W.P.NO.21840 OF 2021

¶6

(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE)

¶7

D.Balasundaram

¶8

 .. Petitioner

¶9

 Versus

¶10

1. The District Revenue Officer, O/o District Collector, Ranipet District.

¶11

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranipet District.

¶12

3. The Tahsildar, Arakkonam Taluk, Ranipet District.

¶13

 .. Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus,
directing the 3rd respondent to pass orders on the
representation dated 24.08.2021 by transferring the patta from
the petitioner's father Late.Duraisamy name to the petitioner's
name for the survey numbers S.Nos.255/2, 255/3, 255/4, 255/5,
259/3, 259/4, 259/7, 259/8, 259/12, 259/15, 259/10 & 259/21
measuring an extent of 65.00 cents at Kizhpakkam Madura
Rajapalayam Village, Arakkonam Taluk, Ranipet District.

¶15

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

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Balasundar
 For R.Balamurugan

¶17

For Respondents : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan,
 Government Advocate

¶18

 ORDER

¶19

 This petition has been filed for a Writ of Mandamus
seeking for a direction to the 3rd respondent to pass orders on
the representation dated 24.08.2021 by transferring the patta
from the petitioner's father Late.Duraisamy name to the
petitioner's name for the survey numbers S.Nos.255/2, 255/3,
255/4, 255/5, 259/3, 259/4, 259/7, 259/8, 259/12, 259/15, 259/10
& 259/21 measuring an extent of 65.00 cents at Kizhpakkam Madura
Rajapalayam Village, Arakkonam Taluk, Ranipet District.

¶20

2. The petitioner's father owned the lands comprised in
S.Nos.306/11, 259/11A, 259, 11B, 259/13, 259/14, 259/16,
259/17A, 259/17B, 259/18, 259/19, 259/2, 259/5, 259/6, 259/9,
252/4, 255/1, 258/1, 258/2, 258/3, 258/4 & 212 along with the
petitioner's land in survey numbers S.Nos.255/2, 255/3, 255/4,
255/5, 259/3, 259/4, 259/7, 259/8, 259/12, 259/15, 259/10 &
259/21 measuring an extent of 65.00 cents situated at Kizhpakkam
Madurai Rajapalayam Village, Arakkonam Taluk, Ranipet District,
by registered sale deeds dated 21.01.1980, 22.01.1980 and
04.06.1980 and registered as document Nos.75/1980, 78/1980 and
2338/1980 respectively at S.R.O. Arakkonam. After issuing patta,
the petitioner purchased the above properties along with his own
properties in the same village.

¶21

3. The Revenue Officials, while issuing patta to the
petitioner's father, included the petitioner's property's survey
numbers along with his father's property's survey numbers and
issued patta bearing No.258 in the name of the petitioner. The
petitioner requested the third respondent to rectify the same
but the third respondent did not respond to the request made by
the petitioner and further did not issue patta in the name of
the petitioner for the purchased properties. The petitioner
submits that he approached the respondents 1 and 2 to issue
patta in the petitioner's name by excluding the survey numbers

¶22

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

¶23

of the father's property and to issue separate patta for the
property which stands in his name as per the sale deeds dated
21.01.1980, 22.01.1980 and 04.06.1980 in registered document
Nos.75/1980, 78/1980 and 2338/1980 at S.R.O. Arakkonam. The said
Authorities have not considered the representation dated
23.07.2021 sent by the petitioner for transferring the patta, as
there is no encumbrance in the said lands, as the Encumbrance
Certificate shows that the petitioner's lands are standing in
the name of the petitioner. As the Authorities did not consider
the same, the petitioner again sent a representation dated
24.08.2021, seeking to exclude the petitioner's father's lands,
which has been clubbed together with his lands and to issue
patta in favour of the petitioner for an extent of 65 cents in
Kizhpakkam Madura Rajapalayam Village, Arakkonam Taluk, Ranipet
District in S.Nos.255/2, 255/3, 255/4, 255/5, 259/3, 259/4,
259/7, 259/8, 259/12, 259/15, 259/10 & 259/21. Till date, the
Authorities have not acted upon the representation made by the
petitioner dated 24.08.2021. Therefore, the petitioner, left
with no other alternative remedy, has approached this Court with
the aforesaid prayer.

¶24

4. On going through the said documents in the typed set
of papers, the sale deeds stand in the name of the petitioner
and the patta bearing S.No.258 stands in the name of the
petitioner's father for the lands purchased by the petitioner in
S.Nos.255/2, 255/3, 255/4, 255/5, 259/3, 259/4, 259/7, 259/8,
259/12, 259/15, 259/10 & 259/21 and it also included the
petitioner's father's lands in S.Nos.306/11, 259/11A, 259, 11B,
259/13, 259/14, 259/16, 259/17A, 259/17B, 259/18, 259/19, 259/2,
259/5, 259/6, 259/9, 252/4, 255/1, 258/1, 258/2, 258/3, 258/4 &
212. The petitioner filed an online application on 23.07.2021
and on 24.08.2021, he also sent another representation but the
same were not considered.

¶25

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

¶26

6. This Court is of the view that as only two months have
gone by after the submission of the petitioner's request, his
case would have been kept under consideration and as the
petitioner has given an online application to the Authorities on
23.07.2021, this Court directs the Authorities to consider the
same and pass orders, based on the documents and if necessary,

¶27

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

¶28

shall give him an opportunity of hearing and then pass
appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a
period of four(04) months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order.

¶29

7. With these observations, this Writ Petition stands
Disposed of. No costs.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

Assistant Registrar(CJ Conf)

¶32

// True Copy //

¶33

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶34

sts

¶35

To:

¶36

1. The District Revenue Officer, O/o District Collector, Ranipet District.

¶37

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranipet District.

¶38

3. The Tahsildar, Arakkonam Taluk, Ranipet District.

¶39

 W.P.No.21840 of 2021

¶40

AK(CO)
RLP(11/11/2021)

¶41

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

D.Balasundaram v. The District Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Balasundaram v. The District Revenue Officer

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

Krishnasamy Vs The District Collector

K.S.Haridoss Vs The District Collector

C.Premkumar, M/a 33 Years Vs B.Chamundeeswari

Mujibur Rahman Vs The Inspector General of Registration

S.Elangovan Vs The Inspector General of Registration

T.Harikumar Vs The Inspector General of Registration