Disposed

A.Narasingam, v. the District Collector

Madras HC25 Apr 2024WP(MD)/6242/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought correction of revenue records. The court directed the Thasildar to comply with the second respondent's order dated 29.08.2018 regarding land sub-division within eight weeks and to issue prior notice to the petitioner and the fourth respondent before passing orders. The writ petition was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Thasildar to comply with the second respondent's order within eight weeks and give prior notice to parties before passing orders.

A.Narasingam, Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.6242 of 2017

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 25.04.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

¶6

W.P(MD)No.6242 of 2017

A.Narasingam

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, District Collectorate Office, Madurai – 20.

¶11

2.The District Revenue Officer, District Collectorate Campus, Madurai – 20.

¶12

3.The Assistant Director, Land Survey Department, Old Ramnad Collector Office, Madurai.

¶13

4.K.Rajesh ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 2 and 3 to pass appropriate orders to correct the wrong entry in the revenue records and accounts in respect of land in Survey No.123 at Anaiyur Bit-I Village, Madurai, by obtaining approval from the first respondent based on the report of the Divisional maintenance Inspector

¶15

1/5

¶16

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

¶17

W.P(MD)No.6242 of 2017

¶18

of Survey, dated 22.06.2015 and to measure the land belongs to the petitioner in S.No.123/3B1 at Anaiyut Bit I, Village, Madurai, based on the changes in entries and measurement in respect of land in Survey No. 123 in the revenue records and accounts.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vijayashanthi

¶20

For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Manikkam, Special Government Pleader, for R1 to R3. : Mr.S.Jeyasingh, for R4.

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus, to

¶23

direct the respondents 2 and 3 to pass appropriate orders to correct the wrong entry in the revenue records and accounts in respect of land in Survey No.123 at Anaiyur Bit-I Village, Madurai, by obtaining approval from the first respondent based on the report of the Divisional maintenance Inspector of Survey, dated 22.06.2015 and to measure the land belongs to the petitioner in S.No.123/3B1 at Anaiyut Bit I, Village, Madurai, based on the changes in entries and measurement in respect of land in Survey No.123 in the revenue records and accounts.

¶24

When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents would

¶25

2/5

¶26

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

¶27

W.P(MD)No.6242 of 2017

¶28

submit that the petitioner has submitted a representation to the second respondent and on that basis, the second respondent after perusing the necessary documents has passed an order, dated 29.08.2018 cancelling

¶29

the sub division made in the S.No.123 and directed the authorities to issue patta on the basis of the sub division documents and the relevant portion is extracted hereunder :

¶30

“Mtzq;fis ftdKld; ghprPyid nra;jjpy; kJiu khtl;lk;> MidA+h; gpl; 1 fpuhkk; Gy vz;.123-y; uapy;Nt Jiwapduhy; vLf;fg;gl;l Gyj;jpid fpuhkf;fzf;Ffspy; cl;gphpT nra;ahky; gy gl;lh khWjy; eltbf;iffs; Nkw;nfhs;sg;gl;Ls;sJ njhpa tUfpwJ. ,jid rhp nra;Ak; nghUl;L Gy vz;.123y; Vw;gl;l gl;lh khWjy; (KOg;Gyk; kw;Wk; cl;gphpT) epfo;Tfs; midj;ijAk; ,uj;J nra;J> Ma;thsh;> epymsit> gjpNtLfs; Jiw> kJiu guhkhpg;G Nfhl;lk; mth;fshy; jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;l cl;gphpT Mtzq;fspd; gb gl;lh jhf;fy; nra;aTk; kDjhuh; jpU.m.eurpq;fk; vd;gthplkpUe;J chpa Mtzq;fis ngw;W kDjhuh; NfhUk; gl;lh khWjy; eltbf;iffis Nkw;nfhs;sTk; kJiu tlf;F tl;lhl;rpaUf;F cj;jutplg;gLfpwJ.”

¶31

The learned counsel for the fourth respondent would submit that

¶32

he is the bona fide purchaser and he may be given an opportunity to canvass his stand.

¶33

3/5

¶34

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

¶35

W.P(MD)No.6242 of 2017

¶36

Considering the order passed by the second respondent and

¶37

taking note of the submission made by the leaned counsel on either side, the Thasildar, Madurai North, is directed to comply with the directions of the second respondent, dated 29.08.2018 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. He is also directed to give notice to the petitioner, fourth respondent and other parties involved, before ever passing orders.

¶38

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No

¶39

costs.

¶40

25.04.2024

¶41

NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No das

¶42

4/5

¶43

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

¶44

W.P(MD)No.6242 of 2017

¶45

K.MURALI SHANKAR, J

¶46

DAS

¶47

¶48

1.The District Collector, District Collectorate Office, Madurai – 20.

¶49

2.The District Revenue Officer, District Collectorate Campus, Madurai – 20.

¶50

3.The Assistant Director, Land Survey Department, Old Ramnad Collector Office, Madurai.

¶51

4.The Tahsildar, Madurai North, Madurai District.

¶52

Order made in W.P(MD)No.6242 of 2017

¶53

Dated : 25.04.2024

¶54

5/5

¶55

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

A.Narasingam, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Narasingam, 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

Ramachandran.M Vs the Dist.Collector

Thangam.L Vs The Tahsildar

Karuppuchamy Vs the Dist Collector

Y-198 Vencode Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Credit Society Vs the Regional Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

Valarmathi Vs the District Collector

M.Peer Mohammed, Vs the Assistant Commissioner