Dismissed

Shanmugavelu v. The District Collector

Madras HC12 Nov 2024WP(MD)/19632/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitioner sought cancellation of pattas issued in favour of other respondents and issuance of patta in his name in respect of government land. The Court dismissed the petition as the matter was pending before the Civil Court for declaration of title and injunction.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with no costs as the civil court is seized of the matter pending adjudication.

Shanmugavelu Vs The District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.19632 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 12.11.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.19632 of 2024

Shanmugavelu

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

¶11

2.The District Revenue Officer, District Revenue Office, Collectorate, Ramanathapuram.

¶12

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.

¶13

4.The Tahsildar, Kamuthi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

¶14

5.Sabarimuthumani

¶15

6.Kasi

¶16

7.Muthuramalingam

¶17

8.Pandi

¶18

9.Marivel

¶19

10.Sangeetha

¶20

...Respondents

¶21

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

¶22

1/6

¶23

W.P.(MD)No.19632 of 2024

¶24

PRAYER:

¶25

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the fourth respondent to cancel the patta stands in the name of the respondents 5 to 10 in Patta No.251, 252, 253, 254, 255 and 256 and to issue patta in the petitioner's name in respect of Survey No.159 Old S.No.126/3A situated at Villanenthal Group, Kamuthi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District based on the representation dated 08.07.2024.

¶26

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muniyandi For R1 to R4 : Mr.A.Kannan Additional Government Pleader

¶27

For R5 to R10 : No Appearance

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the fourth respondent to

¶30

cancel the patta standing in the name of the respondents 5 to 10 and to issue patta in the petitioner's name in respect of S.No.159, old S.No.126/3A at Villanenthal Group, Kamuthi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District, based on the representation dated 08.07.2024.

¶31

The property in S.No.159, old S.No.126/3A at Villanenthal Group,

¶32

Kamuthi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District originally belonged to the petitioner's father. While so, the fourth respondent assigned patta to the respondents 5 to 10

¶33

without verifying the registration documents. According to the petitioner, the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

2/6

¶35

W.P.(MD)No.19632 of 2024

¶36

respondents 5 to 10 are influential persons and managed to get assignment patta in their favour under the scheme established by the Government. The petitioner approached the Sub Collector for cancellation of patta in the name of the respondents 5 to 10 and the Sub Collector vide order, dated 12.09.2023 directed the fourth respondent to take necessary action in respect of the petitioner's petition. Even the petitioner's brother approached the third respondent to cancel the patta in favour of the respondents 5 to 10, but no action was taken. The petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.311 of 2024 before the Sub Court, Mudhukulathur for declaration of title and injunction and the same is pending. Therefore, the petitioner on 08.07.2024 sent a representation to the respondents 1 to 4 to cancel the patta issued in the name of the respondents 5 to 10. As no action was taken, the petitioner filed the writ petition for the aforesaid relief.

¶37

The respondents filed a counter stating that the petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.311 of 2024 on the file of the Sub Court, Mudukulathur for declaration and injunction in respect of the subject property and the same is pending adjudication. The respondents therefore submitted that as the petitioner already approached the Civil Court, the writ petition cannot be entertained.

¶38

Admittedly, the petitioner approached the Civil Court for declaration

¶39

of title and permanent injunction in O.S.No.311 of 2024 on the file of the Sub https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

3/6

¶41

W.P.(MD)No.19632 of 2024

¶42

Court, Mudukulathur. It is seen that as per the Government records, the subject land is classified as Government poramboke. The petitioner having approached the Civil Court to establish his title to the subject property, the writ petition seeking cancellation of patta in the name of the respondents 5 to 10 cannot be entertained at this stage.

¶43

5. In the light of the fact that the civil Court is seized of the matter in O.S.No.311 of 2024 on the file of the Sub Court, Mudukulathur, the writ petition cannot be entertained and the same is dismissed. No costs.

¶44

12.11.2024

¶45

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

¶46

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

¶47

4/6

¶48

W.P.(MD)No.19632 of 2024

¶49

To:

¶50

1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

¶51

2.The District Revenue Officer, District Revenue Office, Collectorate, Ramanathapuram.

¶52

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.

¶53

4.The Tahsildar, Kamuthi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

¶54

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

¶55

5/6

¶56

W.P.(MD)No.19632 of 2024

¶57

N.MALA, J.

¶58

¶59

W.P.(MD)No.19632 of 2024

¶60

12.11.2024

¶61

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

¶62

6/6

Shanmugavelu v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanmugavelu 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

Maragathammal Vs the District Collector

P.Ananth Vs The Tahsildar

Kaliammal, Vs the Tahsildar

Kumaravel Vs The Commissioner of Land Administration

C.Manickam Vs The District Collector

Thandapani Vs The Tahsildar