Allowed

N.Sivagnanam v. The District Revenue Officer

Madras HC28 Aug 2024WP(MD)/19785/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought mandamus to reclassify land from Arasu Poramboke to Natham. Government Advocate agreed reclassification would be completed in 12 weeks; the court recorded this and directed respondents to reclassify the land within 12 weeks. Writ petition allowed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to reclassify Survey No. 267/2 from Arasu Poramboke to Natham within 12 weeks; no costs.

N.Sivagnanam Vs The District Revenue Officer — Property and Title | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.19785 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 28.08.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.19785 of 2024

N.Sivagnanam

.. Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

¶11

2.The Tahsildar, Palayamkottai Taluk, Palayamkottai.

¶12

3.The Village Administrative Officer, Reddiyarpatti Village, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District.

¶13

.. Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

¶15

praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent

¶16

herein to consider the petitioner's representations dated 17.04.2023 and 27.11.2023 and further reminder representation dated 27.07.2024 and

¶17

_________Page 1 of 4

¶18

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

¶19

W.P.(MD)No.19785 of 2024

¶20

pass appropriate orders to reclassify the new survey no. 267/2 co-related to old survey No.178/P, Reddiarpatti Village, Palayamkottai Taluk from “Arasu Poramboke to correct classification as Natham” and pass appropriate orders within a time stipulated by this Court.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Nallathambi For Respondents : Mr.D.S.Nedunchezhian Government Advocate

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Mr.D.S.Nedunchezhian, learned Government Advocate, on

¶24

instructions, would submit that the process of reclassifying Survey No. 267/2 co-related to old Survey No.178/P, Reddiarpatti Village, Palayamkottai Taluk from Arasu Poramboke to Natham would be done within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶25

Recording the above, this Writ Petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to reclassify the petition mentioned land from

¶26

_________Page 2 of 4

¶27

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

¶28

W.P.(MD)No.19785 of 2024

¶29

Arasu Poramboke to Natham within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶30

28.08.2024

¶31

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes abr

¶32

¶33

1.The District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

¶34

2.The Tahsildar, Palayamkottai Taluk, Palayamkottai.

¶35

3.The Village Administrative Officer, Reddiyarpatti Village, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District.

¶36

_________Page 3 of 4

¶37

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

¶38

W.P.(MD)No.19785 of 2024

¶39

P.T.ASHA, J.

¶40

abr

¶41

W.P.(MD)No.19785 of 2024

¶42

Dated: 28.08.2024

¶43

_________Page 4 of 4

¶44

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

N.Sivagnanam v. The District Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Sivagnanam 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Palanisamy Vs Muniandi, S/O.Arunachalam

Thenmozhi Vs The Tahsildar

Veerappa Naicker(died) Vs C.K.M. Abdul Jaffar (Died)

Mehala .v Vs The District Collector

Manikandan .v Vs The Tahsildar

P.S.M.Ahamed Abdul Kadir Vs The District Revenue Officer