A writ petition seeking quashing of a Tahsildar's refusal to grant patta based on a 2015 RDO order. The court found the RDO order rested on neither registered title nor revenue records and dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P(MD)No. 2120 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 24.11.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P(MD)No. 2120 of 2025
and W.M.P(MD) Nos.1496 & 1498of 2025
Ramakrishnan ... Petitioner
Vs
(R5 is impleaded vide Court order Dated.24.03.2025 in WM.P.(MD).4396/2025 in W.P.(MD) No.2120 of 2025)
1/7
W.P(MD)No. 2120 of 2025
PRAYER:
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the fourth respondent in his proceedings in Muu.Mu.A5/3284/2024 dated 15.11.2024 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and consequently, direct the fourth respondent to issue patta in favour of the petitioner for the land in S.No.462/2 situated at Shenbagampettai Village, Thirupathur Taluk, Sivagangai District to an extent of 1.95.5 Ares based on the proceedings of the third respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.Aa3/ 9776/2020 dated 19.12.2020 within a time frame fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Saravanan Senior Counsel for M/s. B. Saravanan Associates For Respondents : Mr.M.Ajmal Khan Additional Advocate General Asst. by Mr.M.Muthumanikkam Government Advocate for R1 to R4 Mr.R.Shankar Ganesh for R5
O R D E R
The matter pertains to the land ad measuring 1 hectare 95.5 ares in survey No.462/2. The petitioner had approached the Revenue Divisional Officer, Devakkottai, seeking patta in respect of this land, on the basis that the petitioner had purchased the property in the year 1996 under Doc.No.5690. Accepting the said contention, the Revenue Divisional Officer directed the Tahsildar to issue patta in the name of the petitioner.
2/7
W.P(MD)No. 2120 of 2025
The said order dated 29.11.2015 was not implemented by the Tahsildar. Therefore, the petitioner filed W.P.(MD) No.12838 of 2024 and the said Writ Petition was disposed of by an order dated 18.06.2024. By the said order, this Court directed the second respondent therein/Tahsildar to pass final orders on the petitioner's representation on merits within twelve (12) weeks. The order impugned herein was issued pursuant to the said direction.
3/7
W.P(MD)No. 2120 of 2025
that he is awaiting the advice of the District Revenue Officer. In these circumstances, learned Senior Counsel submits that the impugned order
cannot be sustained and that interference is warranted.
response. By handing over a file pertaining to the order issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer on 29.11.2015, learned Additional Advocate General submits that the file contains the request of the petitioner for grant of patta and a copy of the purported sale deed. By turning to the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, learned Additional Advocate General points out that the revenue records were not taken into consideration. Instead, based on the petitioner's statement, a finding, without any basis in fact or document, to the effect that the property was in the possession of Chinnaiyavelaar was recorded therein and that patta had not been issued in his name. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that the said order has been issued without reference to either valid title documents or revenue records and, therefore, the impugned order concluding that the petitioner's request cannot be accepted at this juncture contains no infirmity.
4/7
W.P(MD)No. 2120 of 2025
5/7
W.P(MD)No. 2120 of 2025
be commended. I see no reason whatsoever to interfere with such order in the exercise of discretionary jurisdiction. Therefore, this Writ Petition is dismissed without any order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
NCS : Yes/No 24.11.2025 Index : Yes / No (1/3) Internet : Yes / No apd
To 1. The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 2. The District Revenue Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
6/7
W.P(MD)No. 2120 of 2025
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY.,J.
apd
ORDER MADE IN
W.P(MD)No. 2120 of 2025
24.11.2025 (1/3)
7/7
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tahsildar's order declining patta could be sustained given the RDO's earlier 2015 direction to issue patta.
Whether an unregistered document can convey title to land for patta purposes.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Ramakrishnan
The District Collector, Sivagangai District
The District Revenue Officer, Sivagangai District
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Devakottai
The Tahsildar, Thiruppathur Taluk
K. Balakrishnan
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
