Allowed

T.Elansezhian v. the District Revenue Officer

Madras HC7 Nov 2024WP/33289/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras held that an order cancelling a land patta without notice to the petitioner violated natural justice. The petition was allowed, the impugned order quashed, and the case remitted to authorities to restore the patta.

What did the court decide?

Impugned Order dated 13.09.2024 quashed; case remitted to Respondents 1 to 3 to restore Patta No. 589 and pass appropriate orders within 4 weeks.

T.Elansezhian Vs the District Revenue Officer — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.33289 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 07.11.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA

¶6

W.P.No.33289 of 2024 and W.M.P.No.36083 of 2024

Mr.T.Elansezhian

... Petitioner

Vs.

The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, District Collector Office Campus, Dharmapuri – 636 705.

¶11

The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Dharmapuri – 636 701.

¶12

The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Taluk Office,

¶13

Dharmapuri – 636 701.

¶14

S.Vimala

¶15

... Respondents

¶16

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 1^st Respondent in Ni.Mu.14867/2024/PA2 dated 13.09.2024 and set aside the

¶17

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

¶18

Page No. 1 of 6

¶19

W.P.No.33289 of 2024

¶20

same as illegal, without jurisdiction and made in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently, direct the 1^st to 3^rd respondents herein to restore the patta in the name of petitioner in Patta No.589 by cancelling the Patta No.2897 effected in the name of dead person one Mottaiyan @ Savuriyappan, son of Chinnappan in respect of Survey No.265/1, 266/1 in K.Naduhalli, Kolagathur Village, Dharmapuri Taluk and District.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sathiyaseelan For Respondents : Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This Writ Petition has been filed for a Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 1^st Respondent in Ni.Mu.14867/2024/PA2 dated 13.09.2024 and set aside the same as illegal, without jurisdiction and made in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently, direct the 1^st to 3^rd respondents herein to restore the patta in the name of petitioner in Patta No.589 by cancelling the Patta No.2897 effected in the name of dead person one Mottaiyan @ Savuriyappan, son of Chinnappan in respect of Survey No.265/1, 266/1 in K.Naduhalli, Kolagathur Village, Dharmapuri Taluk and District.

¶24

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

¶25

_____________ Page No. 2 of 6_

¶26

W.P.No.33289 of 2024

¶27

Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice

¶28

on behalf of the Respondents.

¶29

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶30

The main grievance of the Petitioner is that the Impugned Order

¶31

dated 13.09.2024 has been passed without notice to the Petitioner despite the fact that the Patta had been transferred in the name of the Petitioner in the year 2012 itself in Patta No.589 by the 2^nd Respondent.

¶32

A perusal of the Impugned Order dated 13.09.2024 would also

¶33

prove the said contention. Therefore, without traversing on the merits of the case and as Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the 4^th Respondent has not been able to repute the said, the Impugned Order has to go.

¶34

Under these circumstances, the Writ Petition is allowed. Therefore, Impugned Order dated 13.09.2024 is quashed and the case is remitted back to the Respondents 1 to 3 to restore the Patta in the name of the Petitioner in

¶35

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

¶36

_____________ Page No. 3 of 6_

¶37

W.P.No.33289 of 2024

¶38

Patta No.589 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

¶39

Order.

¶40

The Writ Petition is allowed with the above observations and directions. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶41

07.11.2024

¶42

Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking Order Neutral Citation :Yes/No rgm

¶43

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

¶44

_____________ Page No. 4 of 6_

¶45

W.P.No.33289 of 2024

¶46

¶47

The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, District Collector Office Campus, Dharmapuri – 636 705.

¶48

The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Dharmapuri – 636 701.

¶49

The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Dharmapuri – 636 701.

¶50

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

¶51

_____________ Page No. 5 of 6_

¶52

W.P.No.33289 of 2024

P.T.ASHA, J.

rgm

W.P.No.33289 of 2024

and W.M.P.No.36083 of 2024

¶57

07.11.2024

¶58

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _____________ Page No. 6 of 6_

T.Elansezhian v. the District Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Elansezhian v. the District Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

E.Jayalakshmi Vs the Inspector General of Registration

Mrs. Hemamalini, Vs the Inspector General of Registration

C.Rajkumar Vs the Thasildar

Ragupathy Vs The Tahsildar

T.Rahman Vs The District Registrar

N.Chandraprakasam Vs the Tahsildhar