Mehrunissa v. the District Collector

Madras HC2 Dec 2025WP/2198/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

patta; online application mandatory/requisite; mandamus to Tahsildar Gingee and District Collector Villupuram; revenue records; S.No.68/4 Sirukadambur village; Ac 1.54 cents; no counter filed by respondents; writ disposed with directions; two weeks to file fresh online application; twelve weeks to pass final orders; WMP 2550 of 2025 closed; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions: petitioners to submit a fresh online application with the second respondent (Tahsildar, Gingee) within two weeks of receipt of a copy of the order; second respondent to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law within twelve weeks thereafter. Connected WMP No. 2550 of 2025 closed; no costs. ¶¶30

Mehrunissa Vs the District Collector — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents (District Collector, Villupuram District and Tahsildar, Gingee) ought to be directed, by mandamus, to issue patta in favour of the petitioners for the property in S.No.68/4, Sirukadambur village, Gingee, measuring Ac.1.54 cents, and make changes in the revenue records. +1 more

¶¶20

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of by directing the petitioners to submit a fresh online application with the second respondent (Tahsildar, Gingee), seeking patta for the property described in the prayer, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶¶31

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioners had not filed the online application which is a requisite for the respondents to consider their claim on merits, they must submit a fresh online application seeking issuance of patta in their name.

¶¶26

Key takeaways

On receipt of the online application within the stipulated time, the second respondent shall pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks thereafter.ratio¶¶31
No prejudice would be caused to the respondents by issuing directions for a fresh online application and its consideration on merits.obiter¶¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WP No. 2198 of 2025 (and WMP No. 2550 of 2025), High Court of Judicature at Madras, Abdul Quddhose J., 02-12-2025: Petitioners Mehrunissa and Sadhakathulla sought a mandamus directing the District Collector, Villupuram District and the Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Gingee to issue patta for Ac.1.54 cents in S.No.68/4, Sirukadambur village, Tindivanam Registration District, Gingee sub-registration district, and to make necessary changes in the revenue records. The respondents had not filed a counter. Observing from the documents filed that the petitioners had not made the online application, which is a requisite for the respondents to consider the request on merits and in accordance with law, the Court disposed of the writ petition directing the petitioners to submit a fresh online application with the second respondent within two weeks from receipt of a copy of the order, upon which the second respondent is to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law within twelve weeks thereafter. Connected writ miscellaneous petition closed; no costs.

¶1

WP No. 2198 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 02-12-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶6

WP No. 2198 of 2025 AND WMP NO. 2550 OF 2025

¶7

MEHRUNISSA

¶8

SADHAKATHULLA

¶9

Petitioner(s)

¶10

¶11

The District Collector Collectorate, Villupuram District

¶12

2.The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Gingee

¶13

Respondent(s)

¶14

PRAYER

¶15

directing the respondents 1 and 2 to issue patta in favour of the petitioners for the property situate at Tindivanam Registration District Gingee sub registration District Gingee Town Sirukadambur village in S.No.68/4 measuring an extent of Ac 1.54 cents and make necessary changes in the revenue records

¶16

For Petitioner(s): Mr P. Dinesh Kumar

¶17

For Respondent(s): Mr C Jayaprakash Government Advocate

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This writ petition has been filed for a mandamus seeking for a direction to

¶20

the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to issue patta in favour of the petitioners for the

¶21

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

¶22

WP No. 2198 of 2025

¶23

property morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶24

2 . Till date, counter has not been filed by the respondents in this writ petition.

¶25

However, as seen from the documents filed along with this writ petition, the petitioners have not filed an online application, which is a requisite for the respondents to consider the same on merits and in accordance with law.

¶26

Necessarily, the petitioners will have to submit a fresh online application, seeking for issuance of patta in their name to enable the respondents to consider the same on merits and in accordance with law within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶27

No prejudice would be caused to the respondents, if a direction is issued to the petitioners to submit a fresh online application, seeking for issuance of patta for the property morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition within a time frame to be fixed by this Court and a direction issued to the competent authority viz., the second respondent to consider the online application on merits and in accordance with law within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶28

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

¶29

WP No. 2198 of 2025

¶30

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the

¶31

petitioners to submit a fresh online application with the second respondent, seeking for issuance of patta for the property morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the said online application, within the stipulated time, the second respondent shall pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law on the said online application, within a period of twelve weeks thereafter. No Costs. Consequently, connected writ miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶32

02-12-2025

¶33

Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No ab

¶34

¶35

1.The District Collector Collectorate, Villupuram District

¶36

2.The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Gingee

¶37

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

¶38

WP No. 2198 of 2025

¶39

ABDUL QUDDHOSE J.

¶40

¶41

WP No. 2198 of 2025 AND WMP NO. 2550 OF 2025

¶42

02-12-2025

¶43

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

Mehrunissa v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mehrunissa v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mehra Computer Systems Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner of GST and central Excise

Madheswari Vs the District Collector

Dr. M.Kunchithapatham Vs the District Collector

Yasothammal Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

N.Punniyakotti Vs the District Collector

S.Ramesh Vs the Tahsildar