The Court disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation within sixteen weeks after issuing notice to all parties, without expressing an opinion on the merits.
Direction to respondents to consider petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders on merits after issuing notice within sixteen weeks.
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: 02.11.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
W.P.No. 23583 of 2021
P. Sakthivel ... Petitioner
Versus
Gengavalli, Salem District.
... Respondents
Prayer : Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.07.2019 to implement the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 30.07.2018 in Na.Ka.4692/2016/Aa1.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Anbalagan
For Respondents : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan Government Advocate.
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.07.2019 to implement the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 30.07.2018 in Na.Ka.4692/2016/Aa1.
648/2B and 648/2C measuring to an extent of 2.79 Cents. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a petition dated 15.06.2016 to the 2nd respondent to cancel the sub-division and to integrate it as Survey No.648/2 measuring to an extent of 1.75.0 Hectare (Acre 4.32 cents) in Patta No.1729, its earlier status. Based on the above said representation, the 3rd respondent conducted field inspection, reviewed all the revenue records and finally submitted a report stating that the difference between the extent mentioned in the document and the extent in the new subdivisions is high and also as the same was created without complying the extent of the documents, recommended to integrate the new sub-divisions in the name of (1) Kandhasamy Gounder, (2) Athiyappa Gounder and (3) Ramasamy Gounder in Patta No.1729 in the earlier status itself. Based on the above recommendations of the 3rd respondent, the 2nd respondent through his proceedings No. Na.Ka.4692/2016/A1 dated 30.07.2018 directing the 3rd respondent to cancel the sub-divisions and send a report on the same. Even after the lapse of seven months from the date of passing the order, no action was taken by the 3rd respondent. Therefore, the petitioner gave a representation dated 24.07.2019 to the respondents to implement the order in Na.Ka.4692/2016/A1 dated 30.07.2018 passed by the 2nd respondent, but, till date, no action has been taken by the respondents. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
gba
To
+1cc to M/s.P.Anbalagan, Advocate, S.R.No.57586 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.57596
W.P.No.23583 of 2021
PMK(CO) SB(15/12/2021)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's representation and dispose of the same on merits within a stipulated time.
Whether a direction for notice to parties is appropriate before disposing of the matter on merits.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P. Sakthivel
The District Collector
The Revenue Divisional Officer
The Tahsildar, Gengavalli
V. Bhavani Subbaroyan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
