Rajiv Gandhi D Vs The District Collector

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 3 and 4 to grant patta in the Petitioner’s

¶17

1/6

¶18

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

¶19

W.P(MD)NO.21731 of 2025

¶20

name for TSR.No.115/104, Ward 10, Madurai Corporation, Madurai North,Madurai District by considering the Petitioner’s representation, dated 10.7.2025, within the time frame stipulated by this Court.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jerin Mathew For Respondents : Mr.D.S.Nedunchezian 1,3 and 4 Govt. Advocate For Respondent-2 : Mr.P.Anbu Nidhi

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The Writ Petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents 3 and 4 to issue patta in the name of Petitioner in respect of the property in TSR.No.115/104, Ward 10, Madurai Corporation, Madurai North,Madurai District, by considering his representation, dated 10.7.2025.

¶24

2.Mr.D.S.Nedunchezian, learned Government Advocate, , learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents 1,3 and 4 and Mr.P.Anbu Nidhi, learned counsel takes notice for the second respondent. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶25

2/6

¶26

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

¶27

W.P(MD)NO.21731 of 2025

¶28

3.According to the Petitioner, he purchased 926 sq.ft of land in the above mentioned survey number under registered sale deed, dated 27.6.2018. In the TSLR records, the extent of the property is not properly mentioned. Though the Petitioner purchased 926 sq.ft of land, only lesser extent is mentioned in the TSLR records. Therefore the Petitioner submitted a representation on 6.6.2025 seeking correction of TSLR records with regard to the extent.

¶29

4.At the time of arguments, the learned counsel for the Petitioner also raised new points like entry in TSLR records in favour of third parties. The points not raised by the Petitioner in his representation cannot be raised in this Writ Petition. Therefore if the Petitioner has any grievance with regard to the entries in TSLR records, he has to submit a fresh representation pointing out the defects in the TSLR records. As far as the present representation is concerned, though it was submitted on 6.6.2025, till date no action has been taken on the said representation. Hence the Petitioner has come before this Court with the present Writ Petition.

¶30

5.The learned counsel for the second respondent/The Commissioner of Madurai would submit that no representation

¶31

3/6

¶32

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

¶33

W.P(MD)NO.21731 of 2025

¶34

was submitted by the Petitioner to the second respondent. Therefore the second respondent is not in a position to consider his request.

¶35

6.Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, the Petitioner is directed to submit a fresh representation to the second respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such fresh representation, the second respondent is directed to consider the said representation and pass final orders on its own merits after affording reasonable opportunity to the Petitioner and other interested parties, if any, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of such fresh representation.

¶36

7.With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequetly, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶37

08.08.2025

¶38

NCS : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No

¶39

vsn

¶40

To

¶41

4/6