Akash Vs The District Collector

Prayer :- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to survey the land at Survey No.135/2A1 in Soorankottai Village, Ramanathapuram Taluka and District by considering petitioner's survey application in No.2025/0123/27/004904 dated 15.03.2025 and consequently, directing the respondents 1 to 6 to rectify the error in FMB sketch at Survey No.135/2A1, Soorankottai Revenue Village, Ramanathapuram Taluk, based on petitioner's representation dated 23.07.2025, in view of the proceedings passed by the third respondent in Oh.Mu.R1/458/2023 N.H-49 unit dated 15.12.2023.

¶23

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Mahendrarajan For R1 to R6 : Mrs.S.Jeya Priya Government Advocate

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the official respondents to survey the property situated in Survey No.135/2A1, Soorankottai Revenue Village, Ramanathapuram Taluk, by considering the petitioner's survey application dated 15.03.2025 and consequently,

¶26

Page 2 of 6

¶27

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

¶28

W.P.(MD) No.22430 of 2025

¶29

to direct the official respondents to rectify the error in the FMB Sketch, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 23.07.2025.

¶30

2.Heard the arguments of Mr.B.Mahendrarajan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs.S.Jeya Priya, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 6. Since no adverse order is passed against the respondents 7 and 8, notice to the respondents 7 and 8 is dispensed with.

¶31

3.According to the petitioner, the total extent of land in the subject survey number originally stood in the name of one Annapoorani in Patta No.987. Out of the said land, 36 cents of land were taken over by the Government for extension of National Highways. Subsequently, the said Annapoorani sold 16.50 cents of land in favour of one Uma Maheshwari and also settled 15 cents of land in favour of her son, Prithvirajan. The remaining extent of 15.5 cents of land was settled by her in favour of the petitioner, who is her grandson. Later, it came to the knowledge of petitioner that the FMB sketch for the subject property had been wrongly

¶32

Page 3 of 6

¶33

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

¶34

W.P.(MD) No.22430 of 2025

¶35

prepared at the time of acquisition of land by Government. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation on 23.07.2025, seeking rectification of FMB sketch. The petitioner also submitted a separate application on 15.03.2025 in Application No. 2025/0123/27/004904, seeking survey of the subject property. The same has not been considered. Hence, the petitioner has come before this Court.

¶36

4.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 6 would submit that the applications of the petitioner for survey and rectification of the FMB will be considered in accordance with law.

¶37

5.In view of the same, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, the respondents 3 and 4 are directed to consider the application of the petitioner dated 15.03.2025 seeking survey of the property and the representation dated 23.07.2025 seeking rectification of FMB sketch and pass final orders on its own merits within a further period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after issuing notice to the petitioner, neighbouring land owners and other interested parties. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No

¶38

_________ Page 4 of 6

¶39

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

¶40

W.P.(MD) No.22430 of 2025

¶41

costs.

¶42

18.08.2025

¶43

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No cp