Vediyammal v. the District Collector
Case brief
What is this about?
In this writ petition under Article 226, the High Court directed the Tahsildar to consider the petitioner's representation to rectify a mistake in land records regarding erroneously included adjacent land owners, without adjudicating the merits of her claim.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.No.26601 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.09.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR
W.P No.26601 of 2024
Vediyammal ...Petitioner
Vs.
- The District Collector, District Collector Office, Krishnagiri District. 2. The Tahsildar, Uthangarai Taluk, Krishnagiri District. 3. Ramasamy 4. Subramani 5. Krishnan ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to conduct the inspection in the land in Survey No.28/3A. 28/3B1, 28/3B2, 28/3C1, 28/3C2 and 28/3D of Thippampatti Village, uthangarai Taluk, krishnagiri District and consequentially make suitable entries in the revenue records and issue within a time frame as may be stipulated by this Court.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Revenue Authorities should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation regarding the correction of land record entries.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Vediyammal
- respondent
The District Collector, District Collector Office, Krishnagiri District
- respondent
The Tahsildar, Uthangarai Taluk, Krishnagiri District
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court