Allowed

Periyamathi v. the District Collector

Madras HC29 Oct 2024WP/31142/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court order, filed as W.P.No.31142/2024, addressed a petition seeking a writ of mandamus to reclassify land from Kallangkuthu (Stone Poramboku) and issue patta. The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation within twelve weeks and disposed of the petition without examining the merits of the claim.

What did the court decide?

The Karnataka High Court (Incorrect Court Name - Source: Madras High Court) directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation regarding land reclassification within twelve weeks and

Periyamathi Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.31142 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 29.10.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

¶6

W.P.No.31142 of 2024

Periyamathi

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The District Collector, Krishnagiri District, Office of the District Collector, Krishnagiri.

¶11

2.The District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri District, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri.

¶12

3.The Sub-Collector, Office of the Sub Collector Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

¶13

4.The Tahsildar, Hosur Taluk,

¶14

Krishnagiri District. ...Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to classify the land in Moornapalli Village Survey No.915 from the Kallangkuthu (Stone Poramboku) and carry out necessary correction in the UDR and issue patta to the petitioner and in respect of legal heirs of (Late)

¶16

1/5

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.No.31142 of 2024

¶19

Moolagaran @ Eallukundan in land Survey No.915, Moornapalli Village, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District and considering petitioner's representation dated 26.02.2024.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr. R.K.Gandhi Fo r Respondents : Mr.P.Sathish for R1 to R4 Additional Government Pleader

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The petitioner herein seeks a direction to the respondents herein to

¶23

reclassify the land in Moornapalli Village Survey No.915 from the Kallangkuthu (Stone Poramboku) and carry out necessary correction in the UDR and issue patta to the petitioner and other legal heirs of (Late) Moolagaran @ Eallukundan in land Survey No.915, Moornapalli Village, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District by considering petitioner's representation dated 26.02.2024.

¶24

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner's father namely Moolagaran @ Eallukundan was in possession and enjoyment of the land to an extent of 8 .8 acres situated in Survey No.915, Moornapalli Village, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District. The said property was assigned to petitioner's father under D-card patta in the year 1972. Thereafter, the petitioner's father submitted a petition before the 3rd respondent to issue regular patta and after verifying all the documents and VAO enquiry reports, the 3rd 2/5

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.No.31142 of 2024

¶27

respondent passed the order dated 19.09.1996 recommending to issue patta

¶28

in favour of the petitioner's father. Pursuant to the said order, the respondents have not issued patta till date and the said land has been wrongly registered as Kallanguthu in UDR. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 26.02.2024 seeking reclassification of the land from Kallanguthu and issue patta in the name of the petitioner and other legal heirs of M oolagaran @ Eallukundan. Since the said representation of the petitioner has not been considered by the respondents, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶29

Learned Additional Government Pleader, who is taking notice for the respondents would submit that the representation of the petitioner dated 26.02.2024 w ill be considered by the respondents on its own merits and in accordance with law, within the time fixed by this Court.

¶30

In view of the same, without going into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 26.02.2024 and pass final orders on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶31

3/5

¶32

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

¶33

W.P.No.31142 of 2024

¶34

With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed

¶35

of. No costs.

¶36

29.10.2024

¶37

Index : Yes/No Speaking order:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No msv To 1.The District Collector, Krishnagiri District, Office of the District Collector, Krishnagiri.

¶38

2.The District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri District, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri.

¶39

3.The Sub-Collector, Office of the Sub Collector Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

¶40

4.The Tahsildar, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.

¶41

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

4/5

W.P.No.31142 of 2024

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

msv

W.P.No.31142 of 2024

¶47

29.10.2024

¶48

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

¶49

5/5

Periyamathi v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Periyamathi 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

M.Anuradha Vs the District Collector

S.Vijayalakshmi Vs the District Registrar

Kanniyammal Vs the Principal Secretary to Government

Kuchi @ Lakshmi Vs The Inspector General of Registration

S.Iqbal Vs the Inspector General of Registration

Rama Balachandar Vs Government of Tamilnadu