Thenmozhi Vs The District Collector

Office of the Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-5. (R6 is impleaded as per order of this Court made in W.M.P(Md)No.16261 of 2025 in W.P(MD)No.16348 of 2025, dated 1.8.2025) ... Respondent

¶20

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order issued by the fifth respondent vide his proceedings in file NO.2024/0103/22/278020, dated 3.1.2024 and quash the same as illegal and un-constutional and consequently direct the respondents to transfer the patta No.360 from the name of Alagammal to the name of the Petitioner and her brothers in respect of the property comprised in S.No.171/3B situated at Konnayoor Village, Ponnamaravathi Taluk, Pudukkottai District, within the time limit stipulated by this Court.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Shajahan For Respondents : Mr.D.S.Nedunchezian 1 to 6 Govt. Advocate

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The Writ Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the fifth respondent rejecting the application filed by the Petitioner seeking mutation of revenue records.

¶24

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶25

2/7

¶26

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

¶27

W.P(MD)No.16348 of 2025

¶28

3.According to the Petitioner, the subject property in S.No. 171/3B with an extent of 1 acre and 50 cents situated at Konnayoor Village, Ponnamaravathi Taluk, Pudukkottai District was allotted to the Petitioner’s father by Boomidhan Board on 30.6.1978. Pursuant to the said allotment, patta was also issued in the name of Petitioner’s father. After the death of Petitioner’s father, the revenue records got mutated in the name of Petitioner’s mother Alagammal in Patta No.360.The Petitioner’s mother died on 18.7.2009, leaving behind the Petitioner and her two brothers Murugesan Manickam and Samayavel Manickam. Therefore the Petitioner and her two brothers submitted an application on 3.1.2025 before the official respondents seeking mutation of revenue records. The said application was rejected and the impugned order was passed by the fifth respondent without giving any reasons and opportunity to the Petitioner. Aggrieved by the same,the Petitioner is before this Court with the present Writ Petition for the relief stated supra.

¶29

4.The learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the impugned order was passed by the fifth respondent without conducting any enquiry and without issuing any notice to the Petitioner.

¶30

3/7

¶31

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

¶32

W.P(MD)No.16348 of 2025

¶33

5.Mr.D.S.Nedunchezian, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents is unable to produce any records to show that the impugned order was passed after issuance of notice to the Petitioner.

¶34

6.Therefore, it is clear that the impugned order has been passed without hearing the Petitioner and without affording reasonable opportunity to the Petitioner. Therefore the same is violative of natural justice principles.

¶35

7.Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the file of the fifth respondent with a direction to conduct a fresh enquiry after affording reasonable opportunity to the Petitioner and her brothers. It is also made clear that since the Petitioner claims that the subject property was originally allotted to her father by Boomidhan Board, the fifth respondent shall also hear the Boomidhan Board/6^th respondent before passing any order. Enquiry of fifth respondent shall be completed and final orders be passed within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶36

8.With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands

¶37

4/7

¶38

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

¶39

W.P(MD)No.16348 of 2025

¶40

allowed. No costs.

¶41

18.08.2025