Disposed

Govindharajan v. the Tahsildhar

Madras HC27 Sept 2024WP/28181/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition for a mandamus directing the Tahsildhar to survey the petitioner's property. The court directed the first respondent to consider the pending online application for survey and pass final orders within six weeks without going into the merits of the claim.

What did the court decide?

Directed the first respondent to consider the online application and pass final orders within six weeks. Writ petition disposed of. No costs.

Govindharajan Vs the Tahsildhar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.28181 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 27.09.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

¶6

W.P.No.28181 of 2024

¶7

Govindharajan ... Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

1.The Tahsildhar, Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District.

¶10

2.The Head Surveyor, Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District. ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing 1 st Respondent to survey the measurement of Petitioner's property situated at Padiyanallur Village, Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District in New Survey No.158/4A1C and totoal extent of 3545 Square feet in vide document No.1135/2004 on the file of Sub-Registered office Redhills, Tiruvallur District and pursuant Petitioner's representation dated 12.08.2024.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Balachandran For Respondents : Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader

¶13

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

1/4

W.P.No.28181 of 2024

O R D E R

The petitioner herein seeks a direction to 1^st respondent to survey his property situated in New Survey No.158/4A1C measuring with an extent of 3545 sq.ft., based on his online application dated 30.07.2024.

¶18

It is the case of the petitioner that he acquired right over the said property under a registered Settlement Deed dated 31.03.2004 vide Document No.1135/2004 on the file of the Sub-Registrar Office, Redhills. The revenue records also mutated in the name of the petitioner subsequently. Now, the petitioner submitted an online application on 30.07.2024 in Application No.2024/0123/01/004304 seeking survey of the above mentioned land and the same has not been considered till date. Hence, a representation was submitted to the 1^st respondent on 12.08.2024 seeking survey of the above mentioned land. The said representation has not been considered till date. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶19

Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader, who is taking notice for the respondents would submit that the online application of the petitioner dated 30.07.2024 will be considered by the 1^st respondent on

¶20

2/4

¶21

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

¶22

W.P.No.28181 of 2024

¶23

Court.

¶24

its own merit and in accordance with law, within the time fixed by this Court.

¶25

In view of the same, without going into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to direct the 1 st respondent to consider the o nline application of the petitioner dated 30.07.2024 in Application No.2024/0123/01/004304 and pass f inal orders on its own merit and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶26

With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶27

27.09.2024

¶28

Index : Yes/No Speaking order:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No dm

¶29

¶30

1.The Tahsildhar, Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District.

¶31

2.The Head Surveyor, Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District.

¶32

3/4

¶33

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

W.P.No.28181 of 2024

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

W.P.No.28181 of 2024

¶38

27.09.2024

¶39

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

¶40

4/4

Govindharajan v. the Tahsildhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govindharajan v. the Tahsildhar

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

K.P.Arumugam Vs B.Ganesan

K.a.Gopinath Vs Mr.J.Radhakrishnan IAS and 2 others

B.Chakkaravarthy Vs the District Collector

Jayasankar Vs the Tahsildhar

K.Ramadoss Vs the Inspector General of Registration

A.S.Sundarambal Vs the District Collector