Disposed

K.Malini v. The Principal Secretary to Government

Madras HC3 Mar 2022WP/4467/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the District Collector to conduct a joint survey of the petitioner's land with all interested officials after giving due notice, to resolve discrepancies in the revenue records and canal sketch.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 3rd Respondent to conduct a joint survey of the land within 4 weeks, giving notice to the petitioner and interested parties.

K.Malini Vs The Principal Secretary to Government — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 03.03.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

W.P. No.4467 of 2022

¶6

K. Malini .... Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009. 2. The Commissioner Land Administration Land Administration Department, 2^nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005. 3. The District Collector, 4^th Floor, M.Singaravelar Maaligai, 62, Rajaji Salai, Chennai Collectorate, Chennai – 600 001. 4. The Assistant Director Survey, Rajaji Salai, 62, Beach Road, George Town, Chennai – 600 001.

¶9

The Tahsildar, No.1, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, 1^st Cross Street, Sholinganallur, Chennai – 600 019.

¶10

The Chief Engineer (General), Water resources organization, Public Works Department, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005. .... Respondents

¶11

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3^rd respondent to grant land measuring extent of 3.6 cents equivalent under RSO 15, Standing Orders of the Board of Revenue and consequently direct the 3^rd respondent to collect the cost of land from the Public Officials involved in illegal tampering of Revenue Records.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Jayasudha For Respondents : Mr.M.Murali, GA

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This writ petition has been filed for direction to the 3^rd respondent to measure the land to an extent of 3.6 cents equivalent under RSO 15, Standing Orders of the Board of Revenue pertaining to petitioner and consequently direct the 3^rd respondent to collect the cost of land from the Public Officials involved in illegal tampering of Revenue Records.

¶15

Mr.M. Murali, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents. By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the time of admission itself.

¶16

It is the case of the petitioner that she is in absolute ownership of the land measuring 3.6 cents (1568 sq. ft.) in Survey No.363/6B (154, Madipakkam Village Group 2) situated at No.153, S. Kolathur Village, Raja Nagar, Sholinganallur Taluk, Kancheepuram District. She purchased the said lands from S. Syril Moses, through a registered sale deed vide Document No.8405 of 2014, dated 09.10.2014 on the file of SRO, Pallavaram and, thereafter, mutation of records were done in her favour. That being so, when the petitioner approached the 5^th respondent for survey of the said land, it is her grievance that the sketch

¶17

report showed that part of the subject land belongs to canal and subsequently the said land was acquired without any notice to her. Aggrieved by the said action, she has come up with this writ petition for a direction.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without conducting joint survey, wrong entries were shown in the sketch as well as the records. Hence, he prays for an appropriate direction from this court, to consider the grievance of the petitioner by affording an opportunity of hearing by issuing notice to the Revenue as well as PWD officials.

¶19

Mr.M.Murali, learned Government Advocate submits that he has no objection for issuance of such a direction by this Court.

¶20

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶21

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, and also taking into account the fact that notice has not been given to the petitioner before passing the order, but, however, in view of the limited relief sought for, without going into the merits of the case, this court directs the third respondent to conduct survey of the subject property after giving due notice to the petitioner as well as other interested persons in the presence of the officials of the 4^th respondent and 5^th respondent and also the officials of PWD, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of order and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law on the basis of the survey undertaken by the 3^rd respondent in the presence of all the aforesaid persons.

¶22

8.With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

SD/-

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

// TRUE COPY //

SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶27

vsi2

¶28

¶29

1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶30

The Commissioner Land Administration Land Administration Department, 2^nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005. 3. The District Collector, 4^th Floor, M.Singaravelar Maaligai, 62, Rajaji Salai, Chennai Collectorate, Chennai – 600 001. 4. The Assistant Director Survey, Rajaji Salai, 62, Beach Road, George Town, Chennai – 600 001. 5. The Tahsildar, No.1, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, 1^st Cross Street, Sholinganallur, Chennai – 600 019. 6. The Chief Engineer (General), Water resources organization, Public Works Department, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005. +2cc to Mr.K.Jayasudha, Advocate Sr.14856 +1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.15076

¶31

W.P. No.4467 of 2022

¶32

mt[co] srg 05/04/2022

K.Malini v. The Principal Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Malini v. The Principal Secretary to Government

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

A. Arun Kumar Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

A. Vellaichamy (Deceased) Vs the Principal Secretary and

K. Kuppusamy Naidu Vs the Tahsildar

Rajagopal Vs S/T. Rep., by Its Commr.

S.Pavadai, Vs the Collector

K.V. Veluamyq Therkale Thottam Vs the Collector