Allowed¶46

P.Palanisamy v. the Tashildhar

Madras HC7 Mar 2025WP/7638/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patta transfer refusal; online rejection order without reasons; two-line order liable to interference; Tahsildar, Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Village Administrative Officer; Sankari Taluk, Salem District; registered sale deed 08.06.2011 Document No.2070 of 2011; remand for enquiry and reasoned order within four weeks; writ of certiorarified mandamus; Article 226 Constitution of India; Tamil Nadu revenue administration; Madras High Court; N. Anand Venkatesh; 24.09.2024; 07-03-2025; W.P No. 7638 of 2025; W.M.P.No.8565 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Online rejection order dated 24.09.2024 of the first respondent set aside; matter remanded to the first respondent to conduct a proper enquiry and pass a reasoned order within four weeks; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition (W.M.P.No.8565 of 2025) closed. ¶46

P.Palanisamy Vs the Tashildhar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶46

Issue for consideration

Whether the refusal order issued by the first respondent in petition No.2024/0103/08/497299 dated 24.09.2024 refusing to transfer patta in the petitioner's name should be quashed and the respondents directed to consider issuing patta to the petitioner.

¶18

Court's answer

If the first respondent was not convinced with the petitioner's application and the documents relied upon, it could have called the petitioner for an enquiry and passed a detailed order assigning proper reasons; instead the application was rejected with a two-line order through online mode, and such an order unsupported by sufficient reasons is liable to be interfered with by this Court.

¶41

Ratio / Principle

The online rejection order passed by the first respondent dated 24.09.2024 is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the file of the first respondent.

¶44

Key takeaways

On remand, the first respondent shall conduct a proper enquiry and pass a reasoned order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶45

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Hon'ble Mr Justice N. Anand Venkatesh), W.P.No.7638 of 2025 (with W.M.P.No.8565 of 2025), decided 07-03-2025: P.Palanisamy v. The Tahsildar & others, Sankari Taluk, Salem District. Petitioner, claiming title under a registered sale deed dated 08.06.2011 (Document No.2070 of 2011), applied online for transfer of patta standing in the names of his vendor's ancestors (Sellappan and Kuppana Nadar); the Tahsildar rejected the application by a two-line online rejection order dated 24.09.2024 (petition No.2024/0103/08/497299) without reasons. Holding that an unconvinced authority ought to hold an enquiry and pass a detailed reasoned order, and that a two-line online rejection unsupported by sufficient reasons warrants interference, the Court set aside the rejection order, remanded the matter to the Tahsildar to conduct a proper enquiry and pass a reasoned order within four weeks, allowed the writ petition, ordered no costs, and closed the connected miscellaneous petition. Statutory reference: Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶1

W.P No. 7638 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 07-03-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

W.P No. 7638 of 2025 and W.M.P.No.8565 of 2025

P.Palanisamy

... Petitioner

1.The Tahsildar

Sankari Taluk, Salem District.

¶12

2.The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar

¶13

Sankari Taluk, Salem District.

¶14

3.The Village Administrative Officer Arasiramani Beat-2

¶15

Sankari Taluk, Salem District.

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

PRAYER

¶18

Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the refusal order issued by the respondent in petition No.2024/0103/08/497299 dated 24.09.2024 and directing the respondents to issue Patta in the name of the petitioner as requested.

¶19

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

¶20

1/4

¶21

W.P No. 7638 of 2025

¶22

For Petitioner: Ms.M.V.Saranya

¶23

For Respondent: Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan Additional Government Pleader for RR 1 to 3

¶24

ORDER

¶25

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings of the

¶26

first respondent dated 24.09.2024, wherein the first respondent has refused to

¶27

transfer the patta in the name of the petitioner.

¶28

Heard Ms.M.V.Saranya for the petitioner and Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan,

¶29

learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶30

The petitioner is claiming right and title over the subject property by virtue

¶31

of the registered sale deed dated 08.06.2011 registered as Document No.2070 of

¶32

The patta as on today stands in the name of Sellappan and Kuppana Nadar,

¶33

who are the ancestors of the vendor of the petitioner. The petitioner, after the

¶34

purchase of the property, submitted an online application seeking for transfer of

¶35

patta in his name. The same was rejected through an online rejection order dated

¶36

24.09.2024. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶37

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

¶38

2/4

¶39

W.P No. 7638 of 2025

¶40

In the considered view of this Court, if the first respondent was not

¶41

convinced with the application submitted by the petitioner and the documents relied upon, the first respondent could have called the petitioner for an enquiry and passed a detailed order by assigning proper reason. The application has now been rejected with a two line order through online mode. The same is liable to interfered by this

¶42

Court since the order is not supported by sufficient reasons.

¶43

In the light of the above discussion made, the online rejection order passed

¶44

by the first respondent dated 24.09.2024 is hereby set aside. The matter is remanded back to the file of the first respondent. The first respondent shall conduct

¶45

a proper enquiry and pass a reasoned order within a period of four weeks from the

¶46

date of receipt of a copy of this order. In result, the writ petition is allowed in the

¶47

above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶48

07-03-2025

¶49

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

¶50

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