Dismissed

G. Selvaraj v. the State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC30 Jun 2023WP(MD)/19983/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court disposed of the writ petition filed seeking a direction to the State to issue patta. The court recorded the submission that appropriate orders would be passed within eight weeks and closed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was closed without any specific relief granted as the matter was directed to be resolved by the respondents within eight weeks.

G. Selvaraj Vs the State of Tamilnadu — Property and Title | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.19983 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 30.06.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.19983 of 2019

G.Selvaraj

... Petitioner

versus

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Secretary to Government, Department of Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare,

¶11

Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶12

The Commissioner of Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare,

¶13

Chennai – 5.

¶14

The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶15

The District Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Officer,

¶16

Tirunelveli.

¶17

1/5

¶18

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

¶19

W.P.(MD)No.19983 of 2019

¶20

The Tahsildar, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶21

The Special Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare and Land Acquisition Officer, Nanguneri – Perungudi Village, Tirunelveli District.

¶22

... Respondents

¶23

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to pass order on the proposals sent by the 3^rd respondent in his letter Lr.No.Pa.1/33902/2014, dated 01.09.2016 enabling the 5^th respondent to issue patta to the petitioner and others, who are the present owners of the land subjected in the said proposals, within a time limit fixed by this Court.

¶24

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Dhanaseelan For Respondents : Mr.M.Sarangan, Additional Government Pleader

¶25

ORDER

¶26

This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus, directing the first respondent to pass orders on the proposal sent by the 3^rd respondent in his letter Lr.No.Pa.1/33902/2014 dated 01.09.2016 enabling the 5^th

¶27

2/5

¶28

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

¶29

W.P.(MD)No.19983 of 2019

¶30

respondent to issue patta to the petitioner.

¶31

The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the first respondent, by his proceedings dated 10.02.2021, directed the 5^th respondent to issue patta to the petitioner. Since the 5^th respondent has to obtain the concurrence of the Adi Dravidar Welfare Department, it requires some more time and appropriate orders would be passed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶32

Recording the submission made by the learned Additional Government Pleader, this writ petition is closed. No costs.

¶33

30.06.2023

¶34

ogy NCC : Yes / No. Index : Yes / No. Internet : Yes / No.

¶35

3/5

¶36

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

¶37

W.P.(MD)No.19983 of 2019

¶38

¶39

Secretary to Government, Department of Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare,

¶40

Fort St. George,

¶41

Chennai – 600 009.

¶42

The Commissioner of Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare,

¶43

Chennai – 5.

¶44

The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶45

The District Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Officer,

¶46

Tirunelveli.

¶47

The Tahsildar, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶48

The Special Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare and Land Acquisition Officer,

¶49

Nanguneri – Perungudi Village, Tirunelveli District.

¶50

4/5

¶51

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

¶52

W.P.(MD)No.19983 of 2019

¶53

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

¶54

ogy

¶55

W.P.(MD)No.19983 of 2019

¶56

30.06.2023

¶57

5/5

¶58

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

G. Selvaraj v. the State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G. Selvaraj v. the State of Tamilnadu

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

Tea Estates India Ltd., Vs the Secretary to Government

Mrs.Shakila Hammed, Vs the Principal Secretary

Manikandan Vs The Inspector of Police

Kavitha Subbiah Vs Mrs.Kakarla Ush I.A.S

Aengalesh Vs the Inspector of Police

V. Ramalingam(Died), Vs the Distrit Collector