Dismissed¶38

Sankarasuppurayalu.K v. The Secretary

Madras HC23 Jun 2025WP(MD)/21017/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mandamus; correction of revenue records; Sy.No.299; Chettiarpatti Revenue Village; 41.5 Ares; natham patta; Patta No.4454; Mugavar Shatriya Commavar Sangam; Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act; no provision for review or revision; Tahsildar rejection; Revenue Divisional Officer appeal dismissed 18.01.2016; District Revenue Officer revision dismissed 26.07.2019; representation dated 25.08.2022; writ petition dismissed; liberty to challenge in other manner known to law; no costs; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; S.Sounthar J.; decided 23.06.2025.

What did the court decide?

None; liberty reserved to the petitioner to challenge the order passed by the 2nd respondent in any other manner known to law. No costs. ¶38

Sankarasuppurayalu.K Vs The Secretary — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.21017 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 23.06.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.21017 of 2022

¶7

K.Sankarasuppurayalu ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Secretary, Revenue Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George,

¶10

Chennai – 600 009.

¶11

The District Revenue Officer, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶12

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sathur, Virudunagar District.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Rajapalayam Taluk, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1^st respondent to reconsider the petitioner's issue for correcting the revenue records in respect of the property in survey number 299 to the extent of

¶15

1/6

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.21017 of 2022

¶18

25.08.2022.

¶19

0.41.5 by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 25.08.2022.

¶20

For Petitioner : M/s.J.Balameenakshi For R1 to R4 : Mrs.K.Malathi Additional Government Pleader

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the 1^st respondent to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 25.08.2022, seeking review of the order passed by the 2^nd respondent.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and

¶24

Mrs.K.Malathi, learned Additional Government Pleader who takes notice for the respondents.

¶25

By consent of both the parties, the writ petition is taken up for

¶26

final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

¶27

2/6

¶28

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

¶29

W.P.(MD)No.21017 of 2022

¶30

It is the case of the petitioner that 41.5 Ares of land in Sy.No.299

¶31

in Chettiarpatti Revenue Village belonged to Mugavar Shatriya Commavar Sangam. The natham patta for the subject property was issued in Patta No.4454 in the name of Mugavar Shatriya Commavar Sangam.

¶32

It is further submitted that in the records maintained by the Taluk Office, the details regarding the subject property has not been properly mentioned. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation before the Tahsildar and the same was rejected by him.

¶33

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred to file an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer and the same was dismissed by an order dated 18.01.2016 challenging the order passed by the Appellate Authority. The petitioner preferred a revision before the 2^nd respondent and the same was dismissed on 26.07.2019 confirming the order passed by the Appellate Authority. Hence, the petitioner submitted an instant representation dated 25.08.2022 before the 1^st respondent seeking review of the order passed by the 2^nd respondent. Under the scheme of the Tamil

¶34

3/6

¶35

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

¶36

W.P.(MD)No.21017 of 2022

¶37

Nadu Patta Pass Book Act, there is no provision enabling the 1^st respondent to review or revise the order passed by the 2^nd respondent.

¶38

Under these circumstances, the prayer sought for in the writ petition cannot be entertained. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, it is open to the petitioner to challenge the order passed by the 2^nd respondent in any other manner known to law. No costs.

¶39

23.06.2025

¶40

NCC :yes/No Index :yes/No Internet:yes/No rgm

¶41

4/6

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.(MD)No.21017 of 2022

¶44

¶45