Disposed¶38

M.Soosai Backiyam v. The District Collector

Madras HC21 Jul 2025WP(MD)/19676/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: writ of mandamus; Article 226; disposal of pending applications; order of seniority; no priority from writ court; enquiry proceedings Aa7/5734/2019; representation dated 31.05.2025; cancellation of sale deeds; fifth respondent; Thoothukudi; Vilathikulam Tahsildar; District Collector; District Revenue Officer; Revenue Divisional Officer; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; W.P(MD); disposed of; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions that the petitioner's pending application be considered and disposed of in the order of seniority by the competent authority following prescribed procedures; no priority conferred by the writ court; no order as to costs. ¶38

M.Soosai Backiyam Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶38

Issue for consideration

Whether the second respondent should be directed (via writ of mandamus) to complete the enquiry proceedings in Aa7/5734/2019 on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 31.05.2025, i.e., whether the writ court can grant priority in disposal of the petitioner's pending application.

¶21

Court's answer

Pending applications are to be disposed of in a systematic manner by the competent authority in the order of seniority; preference in disposal can be granted only in exceptional cases by recording valid reasons.

¶34

Ratio / Principle

Obtaining an order from the writ court does not confer any priority in disposal, since such orders may affect the disposal of other cases pending for a long time.

¶34

Key takeaways

The petitioner's case is to be taken into consideration and disposed of in the order of seniority by following the prescribed procedures; with these directions the writ petition was disposed of, with no order as to costs.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), S.M. Subramaniam J. (order of the court), disposing of W.P(MD)No.19676 of 2025 (dated 21.07.2025) filed by M. Soosai Backiyam, who sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 directing the District Revenue Officer to complete enquiry proceedings in Aa7/5734/2019 (arising from his application to cancel sale deeds executed by private respondent No.5). Held: pending applications must be disposed of systematically by the competent authority in the order of seniority; preference may be given only in exceptional cases with recorded reasons; an order obtained from the writ court confers no priority as it may prejudice other long-pending cases. The petitioner's application was directed to be disposed of in the order of seniority per prescribed procedure; no costs.

¶1

W.P(MD)No.19676 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 21.07.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM and THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE

¶6

W.P(MD)No.19676 of 2025

M.Soosai Backiyam

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Thoothukudi.

¶11

2.The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Thoothukudi.

¶12

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thoothukudi.

¶13

4.The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Vilathikulam, Thoothukudi District.

¶14

1/6

¶15

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

¶16

W.P(MD)No.19676 of 2025

¶17

5.Luruth Bellarmine Chinnarani

¶18

6.Maria Premalatha

¶19

7.Palraj

¶20

... Respondents

¶21

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to complete the enquiry proceedings in Aa7/5734/2019, dated 12.07.2019 on the basis of the representation of the petitioner dated 31.05.2025.

¶22

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Manimuthu

¶23

For RR 1 to 4 : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar Government Pleader

¶24

ORDER

¶25

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)

¶26

The relief sought for in the Writ Petition is to direct the second

¶27

respondent to complete the enquiry proceedings.

¶28

2/6

¶29

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

¶30

W.P(MD)No.19676 of 2025

¶31

2.The petitioner filed an application seeking to cancel the sale

¶32

deeds executed by the fifth respondent in favour of some third parties. Since the said application is pending before the second respondent, the present Writ Petition came to be instituted.

¶33

3.The learned Government Pleader, who takes notice for the respondents 1 to 4, on instructions, submitted that the application is pending before the third respondent.

¶34

4.It is needless to state that pending applications are to be disposed of in a systematic manner by the competent authority, in the order of seniority. Preference to dispose of the applications can be granted in exceptional cases by recording valid reasons. Obtaining an order from the writ Court would not provide any priority, since such orders may affect the disposal of other cases, which are all pending for a long time. Therefore, the case of the petitioner is also to be taken into consideration and to be disposed of in the order of seniority by following the prescribed procedures.

¶35

3/6

¶36

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

¶37

W.P(MD)No.19676 of 2025

¶38

5.With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶39

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶40

[S.M.S.,J.] & [A.D.M.C.,J.] 21.07.2025