Disposed

G.Kaliappan v. The District Collector

Madras HC21 Feb 2023WP/4908/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the District Revenue Officer to dispose of an application for Updation of Revenue (UDR) corrections. The court directed the officer to consider the application on merits within eight weeks after hearing the parties.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders on merits within eight weeks after hearing the parties.

G.Kaliappan Vs The District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.4908 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 21.02.2023

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

W.P.No.4908 of 2023

G.Kaliappan

... Petitioner

1.The District Collector, Dharmapuri District.

¶11

2.The District Revenue Officer, Dharmapuri District.

¶12

3.The Tahsildar, Dharmapuri Taluk, Dharmapuri District.

¶13

4.The Village Administrative Officer, Kukkalmalai Village, Dharmapuri District.

¶14

5.Murugan

¶15

6.Ammasi ... Respondents

¶16

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent to dispose of the petitioner application dated 27.09.2022 for UDR corrections as per the registered documents for the lands in Survey No.43/1, 43/2, 43/6, 19/12A, 19/13B, 19/9 and 21/10 situated at Kukkalmalai Village, Dharmapuri District.

¶17

1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

W.P.No.4908 of 2023

¶19

For Petitioner : Ms.P.Sharmila

¶20

For Respondents : Ms.Akila Rajendran Government Advocate for R1 to R4

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The prayer sought for herein is for a writ of mandamus directing the

¶23

2^nd respondent to dispose of the petitioner application dated 27.09.2022 for

¶24

UDR corrections as per the registered documents for the lands in Survey No.43/1, 43/2, 43/6, 19/12A, 19/13B 19/9 and 21/10 situated at Kukkalmalai Village, Dharmapuri District.

¶25

In respect of property at Survey No.43/1, 43/2, 43/6, 19/12A, 19/13B 19/9 and 21/10 situated at Kukkalmalai Village, Dharmapuri District, it is the claim of the petitioner that it was the family property, thereafter partition was effected among the co-owners i.e. father and brother of the petitioner who are the private respondents herein and as per the partition, the said properties have been allotted to the petitioner. Despite the said allotment having been made since it stood in the name of the family members especially in the name of the 5^th and 6^th respondents who are the father and brother of the petitioner, in order to get patta in the name of the petitioner for the said land as per the partition, the petitioner had given a

¶26

2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

W.P.No.4908 of 2023

¶28

representation or application to the respondents on 27.09.2022, therefore in order to consider the same seeking direction to the 2^nd respondent District

¶29

Revenue Officer since it has been made during the UDR survey, the petitioner has moved the present writ petition with the aforestated prayer.

¶30

Heard Ms.P.Sharmila, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms.Akila Rajendran, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 4. In view of the order going to be passed in this writ petition, notice to the private respondents is hereby dispensed with.

¶31

The learned Government Advocate for the official respondents would submit that, since the UDR correction has been made, it has to be rectified if at all to be rectified only by the District Revenue Officer i.e. the 2^nd respondent to whom the representation given by the petitioner dated 27.09.2022 would be considered and decided on merits, of course after giving an opportunity of being heard to both petitioner as well as the private respondents within a time frame that may be stipulated by this Court.

¶32

3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

W.P.No.4908 of 2023

¶34

Considering the said submission made by the learned Government Advocate for the official respondents, this Court directs the 2^nd respondent District Revenue Officer to consider the said representation of the petitioner dated 27.09.2022 and pass orders thereon on merits and in accordance with law, of course after hearing both petitioner as well as the private respondents within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶35

With this direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶36

21.02.2023

¶37

Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No

¶38

Sgl

¶39

¶40

1.The District Collector, Dharmapuri District.

¶41

2.The District Revenue Officer, Dharmapuri District.

¶42

3.The Tahsildar, Dharmapuri Taluk, Dharmapuri District.

¶43

4.The Village Administrative Officer,

¶44

4/6

¶45

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

¶46

W.P.No.4908 of 2023

¶47

Kukkalmalai Village, Dharmapuri District.

¶48

5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.4908 of 2023

R.SURESH KUMAR, J.

Sgl

W.P.No.4908 of 2023

21.02.2023

6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

G.Kaliappan v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Kaliappan v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shanmugavalli S Vs Revenue Divisional officer

K.Thangarasu Vs The Sub Registrar

Poovathal Vs The Inspector General of Registration

Mr.G.Ravi Vs The Inspector General of Registration

B.Ramani Vs The District Collector

R.Amalan Babu Vs Government of Tamil Nadu