Allowed

G.Chandrakala v. The Tahsildar

Madras HC26 Sept 2024WP(MD)/19162/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the Tahsildar and Head Surveyor to survey and earmark her land. The Court directed the respondents to conduct the survey, issue notices to adjacent owners, hold an enquiry, and pass a speaking order within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing respondents to conduct survey and earmark land within eight weeks.

G.Chandrakala Vs The Tahsildar — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.19162 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 26.09.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Ms.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.19162 of 2024

G.Chandrakala

... Petitioner

/vs./

1.The Tahsildar, Vedasandhur Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶11

2.The Head Surveyor, Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶12

3.V.Suresh

¶13

4.S.Sivakumar ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent No.2 to conduct survey and earmark the petitioner's land in S. No.544/1, Nallamanarkottai Village, Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District to an extent of 1 Acre 32 cents within the time frame stipulated by this Court.

¶15

1/5

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.(MD) No.19162 of 2024

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mahaboob Fazil For R1 & R2 : Mr.B.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader For R3 : Mr.K.K.Samy For R4 : Mr.P.Manikandan

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The above writ petition has been filed for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus

¶21

to direct the second respondent to conduct the survey and earmark the petitioner's land in S.No.544/1, at Nallamanarkottai Village, Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶22

The case of the petitioner is that she has purchased the petition mentioned property from one Punitha Kalidasan, S/o.Subbiah and since then was in possession and enjoyment of the same. She was issued with a patta in patta No. 3317 in respect of the aforesaid property. At this stage, she made an application to

¶23

the respondents 1 and 2 to survey and earmark the land. However, no order has been passed to date. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court.

¶24

2/5

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.(MD) No.19162 of 2024

¶27

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶28

Considering the request of the petitioner and also the fact that the petitioner has made her representation as early as in 2022, a Mandamus is issued to the respondents 1 and 2 to conduct survey upon the petition mentioned property, demarcate the pathway as well as the stream. The petitioner shall submit all the relevant records to show her title to the property and the respondents 1 and 2 shall, after issuing notice to the adjacent land owners and interested parties, hold an enquiry and thereafter proceed to pass orders either surveying the property or rejecting the request. In the case of a rejection, a speaking order shall be passed. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner shall not fence her property, which belongs to her in S.No.544/1, since the land in S.No.

¶29

544/1 is commonly enjoyed by 5 persons. The Revenue Authorities shall be provided with police protection as and when the request is made by the Officials.

¶30

3/5

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.(MD) No.19162 of 2024

¶33

With the above directions, this Writ Petition is allowed. No costs.

¶34

Speaking : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No

26.09.2024

1.The Tahsildar, Vedasandhur Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶39

2.The Head Surveyor, Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶40

4/5

¶41

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

¶42

W.P.(MD) No.19162 of 2024

¶43

P.T.ASHA, J.

¶44

¶45

W.P.(MD) No.19162 of 2024

¶46

26.09.2024

¶47

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

¶48

5/5

G.Chandrakala v. The Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Chandrakala v. The Tahsildar

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

Singakutti Ambalam Vs The District Collector

Manickavasagam, Vs the Tahsildar

V.Nagarathinam Vs The Tahsildar

Dr.T.Saravanan, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Ramalingam Vs The Thasildar

Palaniammal Vs The District Collector