Disposed

Pandiarajan. P v. The District Collector

Madras HC18 Nov 2024WP(MD)/2241/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court directed the revenue authorities to survey and correct Town Survey Record No. 439 based on a sale deed, subject to the petitioner clearing survey charges and adhering to specific procedural guidelines to prevent dispossession during the survey process.

What did the court decide?

Directing the survey authority to conduct a survey within six weeks following payment of charges, with specific procedural safeguards to prevent dispossession.

Pandiarajan. P Vs The District Collector — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

WP(MD)No.2241 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 18.11.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA

¶6

W.P(MD)No.2241 of 2023

¶7

1.P.Pandiarajan

¶8

2.P.Sarala ...Petitioners

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The District Collector, Madurai District,Madurai.

¶11

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai Division, Madurai - 625 020

¶12

3.The Tahsildar, Madurai West Taluk, Madurai – 625 016

¶13

4.The City Sub-Inspector (Land Survey), Madurai West Taluk, Tahsildar Office, Virattipathu, Madurai – 625 016. ...Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to rectify the measurements in the Town Survey Records, more specifically to state in T.S.No.439 and to carry out the correct measurements as found in the registered sale deed dated 30.08.2010 registered as Doc.No.7281/2010 on the file of the Joint-I Sub Registrar Office, Madurai South by considering petitioner's representation dated 15.10.2022.

¶15

For Petitioners : Mr.M.P.Senthil For R1 to R4 : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam Government Advocate

¶16

1/8

¶17

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

¶18

WP(MD)No.2241 of 2023

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This Writ Petition is filed for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to rectify the measurements in the Town Survey Records, more specifically with reference to T.S.No.439 and to carry out the correct measurements as found in the registered sale deed dated 30.08.2010 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 15.10.2022.

¶21

2. It is the petitioner's case that the land in Old Town Survey No. 439 to an extent of 53 square metres belongs to the petitioner and his wife by virtue of a sale deed dated 30.08.2010. The said old survey number was subdivided into T.S.Nos.439, 440/2 and 440/3.After subdivision, T.S.No.349 to an extent of 17 sq.ms and T.S.No.440/2 to an extent of 9.5 sq.ms, totally 26.5 sq.ms was only reflected in the patta issued to the petitioner. In the patta issued for survey No.440/3, third party's name was reflected. According to the petitioner, the total extent for the aforesaid Town Survey numbers were actually 53 sq.mts, but in the patta it was shown as 26.5 sq.mts. The petitioner therefore requested the second respondent to survey the subject survey number and to rectify

¶22

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

¶23

2/8

¶24

WP(MD)No.2241 of 2023

¶25

the erroneous entry in the Town Survey records. As no action was taken by the second respondent, the petitioner submitted a petition to the third respondent on 26.05.2022, but the third respondent also did not take any initiative to rectify the error in the Town Survey records. The petitioner thereafter gave another representation on 15.10.2022, and even thereafter

¶26

the third respondent did not take any steps. Hence, the petitioner filed the above Writ Petition for the aforesaid relief.

¶27

3. By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. It is open to any aggrieved party to move this Court either by way of review or recall of this order, if there is any suppression of material facts by the petitioner.

¶28

4. It is seen that the petitioner gave his representation as early as on 15.10.2022. However, the third respondent has not taken any steps even after lapse of two years from the date of the representation.

¶29

5. The learned Government Advocate submits that the petitioner did not pay charges for survey and therefore, survey was not conducted.

¶30

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is given to

¶31

3/8

¶32

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

¶33

WP(MD)No.2241 of 2023

¶34

understand that necessary charges were paid, but proof for the same was not produced.

¶35

7. In view of the submissions of both the learned counsels, it is ordered that in case the petitioner has not paid charges, the petitioner shall pay the same within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter only, the directions issued in this order would be implemented.

¶36

8. This Court in W.P(MD)No.12676 of 2024, dated 14.06.2024

¶37

issued certain directions for considering the application for survey and fixing the boundary. Following the said order, the following directions are issued:

¶38

(I) The petitioner is directed to submit his / her

¶39

application in on-line mode. The survey authority will scrutinize if the application submitted by the petitioner is in order. Patta need not be in the name of the applicant. If patta is in the name of the vendor and mutation has not been effected, still the application can be considered.

¶40

(II) The petitioner will have to enclose all the relevant

¶41

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

¶42

4/8

¶43

WP(MD)No.2241 of 2023

¶44

documents such as patta. The applicant must have individual patta in his / her name. If he / she is having joint patta, copattadars must give their consent for conducting survey.

¶45

(III) The survey authority will issue notice to the writ petitioner as well as the adjacent land owners and also to the interested persons, if any.

¶46

(IV) Enquiry shall be held. During enquiry, objections raised by the adjacent land owners / interested persons shall be considered.

¶47

(V) If according to the jurisdictional authority, the objections are without any basis, the same shall be overruled and the objectors shall be informed accordingly. But the survey will be conducted only after a period of six weeks so that the objector can move the concerned Court for injunction. If before the proposed date of survey, the objector is unable to obtain any injunction order, the survey can very well go on.

¶48

(VI) It is open to the parties to serve memo of instructions to the surveyor at the time of conducting survey. The same will be borne in mind. While it cannot be binding on the surveyor, the same will be taken note of.

¶49

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

¶50

5/8

¶51

WP(MD)No.2241 of 2023

¶52

(VII) If the jurisdictional authority finds objections to be

¶53

having substance, then, he shall call upon the applicant to move the jurisdictional civil Court for agitating his rights.

¶54

(VIII) If required, the survey authority is empowered to seek aid of the jurisdictional police and the jurisdictional police are mandated to grant police protection.

¶55

(IX) It is made clear that at the end of the survey exercise, survey stones alone can be installed. The exercise of survey and demarcation undertaken pursuant to the direction of this Court can never result in dispossession of any party. If the petitioner wants to put up fencing and if there is any objection from any private party, fencing can be put up only after the petitioner obtains decree from the jurisdictional Civil Court.

¶56

(X) The survey authority will conclude the entire exercise one way or the other within a period of six weeks after service of notice on the interested persons.

¶57

(XI) A copy of the survey report along with sketch will be served on the parties.

¶58

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

¶59

6/8

¶60

WP(MD)No.2241 of 2023

¶61

9. With the aforesaid directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed

¶62

of. No costs.

¶63

18.11.2024

¶64

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No CM

¶65

To, 1.The District Collector, Madurai District,Madurai.

¶66

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai Division, Madurai - 625 020

¶67

3.The Tahsildar, Madurai West Taluk, Madurai – 625 016

¶68

4.The City Sub-Inspector (Land Survey), Madurai West Taluk, Tahsildar Office, Virattipathu, Madurai – 625 016.

¶69

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

¶70

7/8

¶71

WP(MD)No.2241 of 2023

¶72

N.MALA,J.

¶73

¶74

W.P(MD)No.2241 of 2023

¶75

18.11.2024

¶76

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

¶77

8/8

Pandiarajan. P v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pandiarajan. P 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Adhivalavan.a Vs The Commissioner for Land Administration

Rajagopal, S/O.Pitchan, Vs the District Collector

Maharasi, Vs the District Collector

Muthulakshmi.a Vs The District Collector

Arunachalam Vs The District Collector

Gnanavel T Vs The District Collector