Dismissed

K.Veerammal, v. the District Collector

Madras HC19 Nov 2024WP(MD)/12857/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226 seeking issuance of joint patta, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court dismissed the petition as infructuous because the petitioner failed to amend the prayer to quash the rejection order of her initial application, which had already been rejected by the respondents.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous; Liberty given to challenge the rejection order dated 18.08.2017.

K.Veerammal, Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.12857 of 2017

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 19.11.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.12857 of 2017 and W.M.P(MD)No.9955 of 2017

K.Veerammal

... Petitioner

Vs.

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

¶11

2.The District Revenue Officer, Madurai.

¶12

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai.

¶13

4.The Tahsildar, Madurai West Taluk, Madurai. ...Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent herein to issue joint patta in Old S.No.12/2 and new S.No.12/2B measuring an extent of 4.23 Acres which is situated at Melamathur Village, Maduai West Taluk, Madurai District based on the Revenue Board Standing Order No.19 in favour of the

¶15

1/5

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.12857 of 2017

¶18

petitioner and her family members on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 24.05.2017 within a time frame fixed by this Court.

¶19

For Petitioners : Mr.M.Venkatesan

¶20

For Respondents : Mr.A.Kannan Additional Government Pleader

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The writ petition is filed for Writ of Mandamus for a direction to the first

¶23

respondent to issue joint patta in Old S.No.12/2 and new S.No.12/2B to an extent of 4.23 Acres at Melamathur Village, Maduai West Taluk, Madurai District as per the Revenue Board Standing Order No.19 in favour of the petitioner and her family members by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 24.05.2017

¶24

2. The respondents even in the counter at Paragraph No.10 stated that the petitioner's application for grant of patta, dated 24.05.2017 was rejected vide proceedings of the fourth respondent in Letter No.2776/2016/B, dated 18.08.2017.

¶25

2/5

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.(MD)No.12857 of 2017

¶28

3. The petitioner received the copy of the counter on 09.11.2017, and

¶29

inspite of the specific statement made by the respondents, did not choose to amend the prayer in the writ petition to quash the rejection order.

¶30

4. As the respondents have already rejected the request of the petitioner

¶31

for issuance of joint patta on 18.08.2017, the prayer in the writ petition has become infructuous. The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. In any event, liberty is given to the petitioner to challenge the rejection order, dated 18.08.2017, if advised. No costs. Consequently, the miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶32

19.11.2024

¶33

NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no SN

¶34

3/5

¶35

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

¶36

W.P.(MD)No.12857 of 2017

¶37

To:

¶38

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

¶39

2.The District Revenue Officer, Madurai.

¶40

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai.

¶41

4.The Tahsildar, Madurai West Taluk, Madurai. Ramanathapuram District.

¶42

4/5

¶43

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

¶44

W.P.(MD)No.12857 of 2017

¶45

N.MALA, J.

¶46

¶47

W.P.(MD)No.12857 of 2017

¶48

19.11.2024

¶49

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

¶50

5/5

K.Veerammal, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Veerammal, 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muthulakshmi.a Vs The District Collector

Arunachalam Vs The District Collector

Pandiarajan. P Vs The District Collector

Lakshmi Vs The District Collector

Jenita Darathy Vs the District Collector

Dr.K.Vijayabaskar, Vs the District Collector