Disposed¶24

Shanthy v. The District Collector

Madras HC17 Dec 2025WP/10311/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patta dispute, Villupuram District; Tahsildar Melmalaiyanur Taluk order Na.Ka.E1/269/2023 dated 10.03.2023 challenged by Certiorarified Mandamus under Article 226, Constitution of India; Village Administrative Officer, Athipattu Village; private respondent V. Murugan; mediation failed (Tamil Nadu Mediation and Conciliation Centre); parallel pending civil suits between petitioner and 4th respondent; grievance redressable only before Civil Court; writ petition disposed of with direction to approach Civil Court; no costs; single-judge bench (Abdul Quddhose J.).

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; petition disposed of with a direction to the respective parties to approach the Civil Court for redressal of their respective grievances; issued without costs. ¶24

Shanthy Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

WP No. 10311 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 17-12-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶6

WP No. 10311 of 2023

Shanthy

Petitioner(s)

The District Collector Villupuram District, Villupuram

¶11

2.The Tahsildar Melmalaiyanur Taluk, Villupuram District

¶12

3.The Village Administrative Officer, Athipattu Village, Melmalaiyanur Taluk, Villupuram District.

¶13

4.V. Murugan

¶14

Respondent(s)

¶15

PRAYER This writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the 2^nd Respondent in Na.Ka.E1/269/2023, dated 10.03.2023 and quash the same and consequently issued direction to the 2^nd Respondent to issue patta as per the findings of the sub division to the petitioner.

¶16

For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.Balaguru Swamy

¶17

For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Arumugam Government Advocate for R1 to R3 Mr.D.Senthil Kumar For R4

¶18

1/4

¶19

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

¶20

WP No. 10311 of 2023

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The Mediation between the parties has failed as seen from the Mediation report submitted by the Tamil Nadu Mediation and Conciliation Centre, attached to this Court.

¶23

However as seen from the documents filed along with this writ petition, it is an undisputed fact that both the parties in the suit namely the petitioner and the 4^th respondent, have filed separate civil suits which are still pending. In view of the same, necessarily the parties will have to approach the Civil Court only for redressal of their grievance as rightly held in the impugned order. This Court does not find any merit in this writ petition as the grievance of the petitioner can be redressed only before the Civil Court.

¶24

Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of by directing the respective parties to approach the Civil Court for redressal of their respective grievance. No costs.

¶25

17-12-2025

¶26

vum Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order

¶27

2/4

¶28

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

¶29

WP No. 10311 of 2023

¶30

¶31