Dismissed

J.Ravi v. The District Collector

Madras HC28 Mar 2023WP/9360/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed this writ petition where the petitioner sought cancellation of patta granted to persons in a waterbody area. The court held the prayer was not maintainable as only the Revenue Divisional Officer is empowered under the relevant Act to address the grievance.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with liberty to approach the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned.

J.Ravi Vs The District Collector — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.9360 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 28.03.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.T.RAJA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶8

Writ Petition No.9360 of 2023

¶9

J.Ravi .. Petitioner

¶10

¶11

1. The District Collector Krishnagiri Krishnagiri District.

¶12

The Revenue Divisional Officer Krishnagiri Krishnagiri District.

¶13

The Tahsildar Uthangarai Krishnagiri District.

¶14

Rajeswari

¶15

Kumar .. Respondents

¶16

Prayer: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to

¶17

Page 1 of 4

¶18

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

¶19

W.P.No.9360 of 2023

¶20

consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.02.2022 and cancel the patta granted to all persons in water resources area (Kasivu Neer Kuttai) situated in between the Kattanoor Survey No.5 and Vennampatti Survey No.11.

¶21

For the Petitioner : Mr.K.Thiruvengadam For the Respondents : Mr.P.Muthukumar State Government Pleader for Respondents 1 to 3

¶22

ORDER

¶23

(Made by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice)

¶24

This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 23.02.2022, wherein he sought cancellation of the patta granted to all persons enjoying in the land area in the waterbody situated in between the Kattanoor Survey No.5 and Vennampatti Survey No.11.

¶25

Mr.P.Muthukumar, learned State Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3, submitted that prayer sought in the writ petition is not maintainable, as the Revenue Divisional Officer alone is empowered under Section 12 of the Tamil Nadu Patta Page 2 of 4

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.No.9360 of 2023

¶28

Passbook Act to redress the grievance of the petitioner.

¶29

In view of the above submission, this writ petition is dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Revenue

¶30

Divisional Officer concerned. There will be no order as to costs.

¶31

(T.R., ACJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 28.03.2023

¶32

Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No

¶33

kpl

¶34

¶35

The District Collector Krishnagiri Krishnagiri District.

¶36

The Revenue Divisional Officer Krishnagiri Krishnagiri District.

¶37

The Tahsildar Uthangarai Krishnagiri District.

¶38

Page 3 of 4

¶39

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

¶40

W.P.No.9360 of 2023

¶41

T.RAJA, ACJ, and D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J

(kpl)

W.P.No.9360 of 2023

28.03.2023

Page 4 of 4

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

J.Ravi v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J.Ravi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The District Revenue Officer Vs Ellappa @ Lingappa

R Bhuvaneswari Vs State Of Tamilnadu

Sarasu Vs R.Kamalam

M.Ramathal Vs The Executive Engineer

R.Manikandan Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

R.Saravanan Vs The District Collector