Dismissed¶28

E.Lakshmi v. the Commissioner

Madras HC2 Apr 2025WP/10488/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of Article 226 mandamus petition before adjudication; no legal principle decided. Keywords: patta; Land Reforms Department; District Revenue Officer Erode; Tahsildar Modakurichi Taluk; Re-Survey no 898/2; Vdukapatti village; Erode District; Na.Ka. No.K1/6816/2024; communication dated 29.08.2024; writ of mandamus; dismissed as withdrawn; endorsement by counsel; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed; Shanmugam; E.Lakshmi; C.Prabakaran; P.Sathish Additional Government Pleader.

What the court decided

AI extract

E.Lakshmi Vs the Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

1/4

¶2

WP No. 10488 of 2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶4

DATED: 02-04-2025

¶5

CORAM

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶7

WP No. 10488 of 2025 and WMP No. 11813 of 2025

E.Lakshmi

Petitioner(s)

The Commissioner Land Reforms Department, Ezhilagam, Chepuak, Chennai 600 005

¶12

2.The District Revenue Officer Erode District, Erode

¶13

3.The Tahsildar

¶14

Modakurichi Taluk, Erode District

¶15

4.Shanmugam

¶16

Respondent(s)

¶17

PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for

¶18

issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to issue patta in favour of the petitioner in respect land comprised in Re-Survey no 898/2, situate at Vdukapatti village, Modakurichi Taluk, Erode District, in light of the

¶19

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

¶20

2/4 WP No. 10488 of 2025

¶21

light of the communication of the 1st Respondent to the 2nd respondent dated 29.08.2024 in Na.Ka. No.K1/ 6816 / 2024 within stipulated time.

¶22

For Petitioner(s): Mr.C.Prabakaran For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Sathish Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R3

¶23

ORDER

¶24

When this Court was not inclined to entertain this writ petition, the