Dismissed

A.Ravikumar v. The Thasildar

Madras HC30 Jan 2023WP/2152/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of a patta application. The Court held that since an appeal remedy exists under the Patta Passbook Act, the writ petition could not be entertained without exhausting such remedies, though liberty was granted to file the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to file an appeal against the impugned order with the Revenue Divisional Officer within two weeks.

A.Ravikumar Vs The Thasildar — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.2152 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 30.01.2023

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

¶6

Writ Petition No.2152 of 2023 and W.M.P.No.2235 of 2023

¶7

A.Ravikumar …. Petitioner

¶8

-Vs-

¶9

The Thasildar Office of the Thasildar Rasipuram Taluk Namakkal District.

¶10

…. Respondent

¶11

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order No.2022/0103/09/309569 dated 13.01.2023 of the respondent and to quash the same, consequently direct the respondent to issue patta in the name of the petitioner within a time to be stipulated by this Court.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Shanmugam For Respondent : Mr.R.P.Muruganraja Government Advocate

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

1 / 4

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P.No.2152 of 2023

¶17

The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order No.2022/0103/09/309569 dated 13.01.2023 of the respondent and to quash the same, consequently direct the respondent to issue patta in the name of the petitioner within a time to be stipulated by this Court.

¶18

The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the respondent Thasildar dated 13.01.2023, rejecting the request of the petitioner to issue patta in the name of the petitioner.

¶19

Heard Mr.G.Shanmugam learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.P.Muruganraja, learned Government Advocate for the respondent.

¶20

The impugned order has been passed by the revenue Tahsildar within the meaning of the provisions of the Patta Passbook Act, as against which appeal can be filed by the petitioner if he is aggrieved over the said order, to the appellate authority viz., Revenue Divisional Officer concerned. Without exhausting the appeal remedy and subsequent revisional remedy before the District Revenue Officer concerned, since the petitioner has approached this Court, the writ petition cannot be entertained. On that ground, the writ petition is dismissed, however with a liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal against the

¶21

2 / 4

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

W.P.No.2152 of 2023

¶24

impugned order to the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and if such appeal is filed, the same shall be entertained by the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned and orders shall be passed on merits and in accordance with law. Registry is directed to return back the impugned order, if it is original, after retaining a photocopy of the same and getting acknowledgment from the learned counsel on record. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶25

30.01.2023

¶26

Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No Speaking Order / Non-speaking order KST To

¶27

The Thasildar Office of the Thasildar Rasipuram Taluk Namakkal District.

¶28

3 / 4

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶30

W.P.No.2152 of 2023

¶31

R. SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶32

KST

¶33

W.P.No. 2152 of 2023

¶34

30.01.2023

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

4 / 4

A.Ravikumar v. The Thasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Ravikumar v. The Thasildar

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

S.S.Gunavathy Vs The Thasildhar

G.Arumugam Vs The District Collector

Vivekananthan Vs The District Collector

V.Radhakrishnan Vs The District Collector

M.Kantha Vs The District Reigstrar

N.M.Thyagarajan Vs The District Revenue officer