Sundara Naicker Vs The Secretary to Government — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Sundara Naicker Vs The Secretary to Government — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the 4th respondent (Special Tashildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare Department, Kovillpatti) to communicate its decision to the petitioner within two (2) weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; liberty left to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law if aggrieved; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should be directed, by writ of mandamus under Article 226, to transfer the patta for the property in S.No.201/1B (0.67 cents), Nadukattur, Vilathikulam Taluk, Thoothukudi District, to the petitioner based on his representation dated 25.07.2024. +1 more

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations and directions, with no order as to costs.

Ratio / Principle

In the light of the stand taken by the 4th respondent, the Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, directed the 4th respondent to communicate its decision to the petitioner within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order; if aggrieved by that decision, the petitioner may work out his remedy in the manner known to law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), W.P.(MD)No.21937 of 2025 — Sundara Naicker v. The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department and 3 others — S. Sounthar, J. — 12.08.2025 — Writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking transfer of patta / re-conveyance of land in S.No.201/1B (0.67 cents), Nadukattur, Vilathikulam Taluk, Thoothukudi District, based on the petitioner's representation dated 25.07.2024; land was acquired in 1979 for a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe house-site scheme, and an earlier writ (W.P(MD)No.21501 of 2015) had already directed submission of a fresh representation; per the 4th respondent's written instructions (Na.Ka.No.A/431/2004 dated 12.08.2025), the property stood assigned to 11 beneficiaries on 10.03.1980, the petitioner allegedly prevented their enjoyment, cancellation of the assignments of 10 deceased beneficiaries was underway, and re-conveyance could not be considered at this stage — the Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits, directed the 4th respondent to communicate its decision within two (2) weeks, leaving the petitioner free to pursue legal remedies if aggrieved; writ petition disposed of, no costs.

W.P.(MD)No.21937 of 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 12.08.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

W.P.(MD).No.21937 of 2025

Sundara Naicker

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Fort. St. George,

Sheena.

The Director, Adi Dravidar Welfare Department, Chennai.

The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

The Special Tashildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare Department, Kovillpatti, Thoothukudi District. ... Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to transfer the Patta to the Petitioner's name for the property in

1/6

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

W.P.(MD)No.21937 of 2025

Survey No.201/1B to an extent of 0.67 cents situated at Nadukattur, Vilathikulam Taluk, Thoothukudi District., based on the petitioner's representation dated 25.07.2024 as expeditiously as possible.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Prabu

For R1 to R4 : Mr.A.Baskaran Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to transfer the patta in respect of the property situated in S.No.201/1B with an extent of 0.67 cents situated at Nadukattur, Vilathikulam Taluk, Thoothukudi District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 25.07.2024.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.A.Baskaran, learned Additional Government Pleader, who takes notice

for the respondents 1 to 4.

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

final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

2/6

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

W.P.(MD)No.21937 of 2025

According to the petitioner, the subject property was acquired for

providing house sites to persons belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes in the year 1979. Subsequently, one Seenu Muthu Thevar executed a gift deed in favour of the government by giving away the property situated in S.No.277/5 to enable the government to implement free patta schemes. Therefore, the Government shifted the project to the other survey numbers gifted by the said Seenu Muthu Thevar. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation seeking re-conveyance of the land acquired from him. The same was not considered. Hence, a writ petition was filed in W.P(MD)No.21501 of 2015, seeking a direction to the respondents to re-convey the property in S.F.No.201/1B acquired from the petitioner and transferted the patta in his name.

The said writ petition was disposed of by directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation before the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, within two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the said authority was directed to consider the representation within a period of three (3) months therefrom.

3/6

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

W.P.(MD)No.21937 of 2025

Subsequently, the petitioner submitted a fresh representation before the 1^st respondent and the petitioner received a communication from the 4^th respondent on 23.02.2022, that steps were being taken to re-convey the lands. However, till date the petitioner has not received any communication. Therefore, again the petitioner has submitted a representation on 25.07.2024 to the respondents 1 to 4 to take steps to re-convey his land situated in S.F.No.201/1B. The same has not been considered. Hence, the petitioner has come before this Court.

The learned Additional Government Pleader who takes notice for the respondents, based on the written instructions from the 4^th respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.A/431/2004 dated 12.08.2025 would submit that the subject property was assigned in favour of the 11 beneficiaries as early as on 10.03.1980 and the petitioner has prevented the beneficiaries from constructing house in the subject property. It is further stated that the respondents are taking steps to cancel the assignment issued in favour of the 10 beneficiaries who are no more. It is also stated by the 4^th respondent in his written instructions, request of the petitioner for reconveyance of the land cannot be considered at this stage.

4/6

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

W.P.(MD)No.21937 of 2025

According to the 4^th respondent, the property is acquired in the year 1979 and assignments were made in favour of 11 beneficiaries in the

year 1980 itself. It is also stated that the petitioner prevented the beneficiaries from enjoying the subject property.

In the light of the stand taken by the 4^th respondent, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter is inclined to direct the 4^th respondent to communicate its decision to the petitioner within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the petitioner is aggrieved by said decision, it is open to him to workout his remedy in the manner known to law.

The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations and directions. No costs.

12.08.2025

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

5/6

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

W.P.(MD)No.21937 of 2025

S.SOUNTHAR , J.

rgm

To

The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Fort. St. George, Sheena.

The Director, Adi Dravidar Welfare Department, Chennai.

The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

The Special Tashildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare Department, Kovillpatti, Thoothukudi District.

W.P.(MD).No.21937 of 2025

12.08.2025

6/6

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