Thukkaiyannan Vs The District Revenue Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Thukkaiyannan Vs The District Revenue Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Conditional indulgence only: a further six weeks (instead of the eight requested) granted to obtain an injunction from the jurisdictional civil Court; failing which the revenue authorities may proceed with the survey; civil court directed to expedite disposal of the interlocutory application; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, having failed to obtain an injunction within the earlier eight-week window, can still prevent the survey of S.No.131/4 (ext. 0.27.00 ha), Ammapatti Village, Bodinayakkanur Taluk, conducted at the instance of the fourth respondent, and whether the impugned order dated 04.03.2025 should stand. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Notwithstanding the petitioner's failure to act within the time limit fixed in the earlier order, a further six weeks (rather than the eight weeks sought by counsel) was granted to the petitioner to move the jurisdictional civil Court for relief.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner does not obtain an injunction from the jurisdictional civil Court within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the revenue authorities are at liberty to proceed with the survey.ratio¶28
The jurisdictional civil Court was directed to consider and dispose of the interlocutory application in the said civil suit expeditiously, so that the conditional window resolves promptly.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (Article 226, Certiorarified Mandamus), Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, decided 16.09.2025 by Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J. Petitioner Thukkaiyannan challenged the order dated 04.03.2025 (Na.Ka.No.5483/2024/S) of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Bodinayakkanur Taluk, issued pursuant to the order dated 15.11.2024 in W.P.(MD) No.27368 of 2024, by which the petitioner-as-objector had been given eight weeks to obtain an injunction from the jurisdictional civil Court against survey of S.No.131/4 (0.27.00 ha), Ammapatti Village, at the instance of the fourth respondent, Rajan (who, per counsel's submissions, acquired title under a partition deed and holds patta). Having failed to act within the earlier window, the petitioner was granted a further six weeks; if no injunction results within that period, the revenue authorities (District Revenue Officer, Revenue Divisional Officer, Tahsildhar - Theni District) are free to proceed with the survey, and the jurisdictional civil Court is to dispose of the interlocutory application expeditiously. No costs.

W.P.(MD)No.13416 of 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED :16.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

W.P.(MD)No.13416 of 2025

Thukkaiyannan

... Petitioner

Vs.

The District Revenue Officer Theni District Theni.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Bodinayakkanur Taluk Theni District.

3. The Tahsildhar Bodinayakkanur Taluk Theni District.

Rajan ... Respondents

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the Impugned order dated 04.03.2025 in proceedings in Na.Ka.No.5483/2024/S of the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the respondents 1 to 3 not to survey the property in S.No.131/4 to an extent of 0.27.00 Hectors respectively situated in Ammapatti Village, bodinayakkanur Taluk, Theni District in

1/5

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

W.P.(MD)No.13416 of 2025

accordance with law.

For Petitioners :Mr.V.G.Vallarasu Chezhiyan For Respondents :Mr.P.Thambidurai Governance Advocate for R1 to R3 Mr.C.Prithviraj for R4

O R D E R

By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges an order dated 04.03.2025 and thereby seeks to prevent the conduct of survey at the instance of the fourth respondent.

The impugned order was issued pursuant to order dated 15.11.2024 in W.P.(MD) No.27368 of 2024. By such order, the objector was granted eight weeks time to move the jurisdictional civil Court for an injunction. The agreed position is that no such injunction has been obtained by the petitioner as on date. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if he is given a further eight weeks, he will approach the jurisdictional civil Court for relief.

Learned counsel for the fourth respondent submits that he acquired title to the land under partition deed dated 24.06.1997 bearing

2/5

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

W.P.(MD)No.13416 of 2025

Document No.1280 of 1987. He also states that the patta is in his name and that he is entitled to request for a survey.

The petitioner failed to approach the jurisdictional court within the time limit prescribed in the earlier order. Nonetheless, in view of the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is granted a further six weeks to move the jurisdictional civil Court for relief. It is made clear that if the petitioner is unable to obtain an order of injunction from the jurisdictional civil Court within the period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the revenue authorities are at liberty to proceed with the survey. The jurisdictional civil Court shall consider and dispose of the interlocutory application in the said civil suit expeditiously. No costs.

16.09.2025 NCC :No Internet :Yes Index :No PKN

3/5

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

W.P.(MD)No.13416 of 2025

To

The District Revenue Officer Theni District Theni.

The Revenue Divisional Officer Bodinayakkanur Taluk Theni District.

The Tahsildhar Bodinayakkanur Taluk Theni District.

4/5

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

W.P.(MD)No.13416 of 2025

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

PKN

W.P.(MD)No.13416 of 2025

16.09.2025

5/5

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