M.Seethalakshmi Vs The District collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

M.Seethalakshmi Vs The District collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the petitioner to argue the appeal against the impugned order dated 30.09.2025 and, if unsuccessful therein, to make a request for allotment of an alternate house site; petition and miscellaneous petition dismissed as withdrawn with no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned notice Na.Ka.A8/1516/2025 dated 30.09.2025 issued by the 4th respondent under Section 6 of the Chennai III Act, 1905 is liable to be quashed and the respondents restrained from removing the petitioner's house at Survey No. 113/1B (Natham), Ariyanenthal Village, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is permitted to argue the appeal already instituted against the impugned order dated 30.09.2025 and, if unsuccessful in the appeal, to make a request for allotment of an alternate house site.

Key takeaways

In light of counsel's endorsement that the writ petition is not pursued (an appeal having been instituted against the impugned order), the writ petition and the connected miscellaneous petition are dismissed as withdrawn, with no costs. The merits of the challenge to the notice were not decided.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench (Anita Sumanth & C.Kumarappan JJ.) — W.P.(MD)No.30286 of 2025 (with W.M.P.(MD)No.23481 of 2025), decided 25.10.2025. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India sought a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash notice Na.Ka.A8/1516/2025 dated 30.09.2025 passed by the 4th respondent (Tahsildar, Kariyapatti Taluk Office) under Section 6 of the Chennai III Act, 1905, and to forbear the respondents from removing the petitioner's house at Survey No. 113/1B, extent 2 3/4 cents (Natham), Ariyanenthal Village, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District. Counsel for the petitioner (Mr.P.Manokaran) endorsed non-pursuance, the petitioner having already instituted an appeal against the impugned order, and undertook to argue the appeal and, if unsuccessful, to seek allotment of an alternate house site. The Court permitted this and dismissed the writ petition and miscellaneous petition as withdrawn, with no costs. No point of law or merits was adjudicated; the judgment has value only as recording the withdrawal and the liberty granted.

W.P.(MD)No.30286 of 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 25.10.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

W.P.(MD)No.30286 of 2025 and

W.M.P.(MD)No.23481 of 2025

M.Seethalakshmi

... Petitioner

/Vs./

The District Collector, Collectorate Campus, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

The District Revenue Officer, Collectorate Campus, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

The District Aadhi Diraravidar Welfare Officer, Collectorate Campus, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

The Tahsildar, Kariyapatti Taluk Office, Kariyapatti, Virudhunagar District.

The Revenue Inspector, Kariyapatti Firka Office, Kariyapatti, Virudhunagar District.

... Respondents

1/4

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

PRAYER:- Writ Petition - filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

W.P.(MD)No.30286 of 2025

PRAYER:- Writ Petition - filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records pertaining to the impugned notice vide in Na.Ka.A8/1516/2025 dated 30.09.2025 passed by the 4^th Respondent under Section 6 of the Chennai III Act, 1905 QUASH the same and consequently forbearing the respondents or its men or agents from with confiscated to remove the petitioner's house situated at survey No. 113/1B extent of 2 ¾ cents (Natham) Ariyanenthal Village, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District from lawful possession of the property.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Manokaran For Respondents : Mr.J.Ashok Special Government Pleader

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.)

Mr.P.Manokaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

makes an endorsement to the effect that this writ petition is not pursued, since the petitioner has already instituted an appeal against the impugned order dated 30.09.2025. He also states that the petitioner will argue the

2/4

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

W.P.(MD)No.30286 of 2025

appeal and make a request for allotment of an alternate house site, should

he be unsuccessful in the appeal itself. He is permitted to do so.

In light of the above, this writ petition as also the

miscellaneous petition are dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.

[A.S.M.J.,] & [C.K.J.,] 25.10.2025

NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No sm

TO:-

The District Collector, Collectorate Campus, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

The District Revenue Officer, Collectorate Campus, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

The District Aadhi Diraravidar Welfare Officer, Collectorate Campus, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

The Tahsildar, Kariyapatti Taluk Office, Kariyapatti, Virudhunagar District.

The Revenue Inspector, Kariyapatti Firka Office, Kariyapatti, Virudhunagar District.

3/4

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

W.P.(MD)No.30286 of 2025

DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J. AND C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

sm

Order made in W.P.(MD)No.30286 of 2025

Dated: 25.10.2025

4/4

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