Allowed

Pr. Mahendran v. The District Collector

Madras HC19 Feb 2025WP(MD)/4307/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner's patta transfer application based on his father's Will was rejected online by the Zonal Deputy Tahsildar without notice or enquiry. The court held the rejection violated natural justice, set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter for fresh enquiry with personal hearing under the Patta Passbook Act.

What did the court decide?

Impugned rejection order set aside; matter remitted to fifth respondent for fresh enquiry with personal hearing and final orders within twelve weeks.

Pr. Mahendran Vs The District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.4307 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 19.02.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.4307 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.3081 & 3083 of 2025

PR.Mahendran

.... Petitioner

/Vs./

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai.

¶11

2.The District Revenue Officer, Sivagangai.

¶12

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai.

¶13

4.The Tahsildar, Devakottai Taluk, Devakottai,

¶14

Sivagangai District.

¶15

5.The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Devakottai Taluk, Devakottai, Sivagangai District.

¶16

6.The Village Administrative Officer, Aravayal Group,

¶17

1/5

¶18

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

¶19

W.P.(MD)No.4307 of 2025

¶20

Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District.

¶21

7.C.Jeevanandham ... Respondents

¶22

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings of the fifth respondent dated 31.07.2024 in file No.2024/0103/23/219554 and quash the same and direct the respondents to issue patta to the petitioner for the lands in Survey No. 108/18, admeasuring a total extent of 40 cents, in Aaravayal Village and Group, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District.

¶23

For Petitioner : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan For R1 to R6 : Mr.B.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioner challenges the impugned order of the fifth

¶26

respondent dated 31.07.2024 rejecting the petitioner's request for patta transfer in his name.

¶27

It is the specific case of the petitioner that patta was

¶28

mutated in the name of his father, who executed his last Will and

¶29

2/5

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.(MD)No.4307 of 2025

¶32

testament bequeathing the subject property to the petitioner. Under the strength of the said Will, the petitioner has sought for name transfer in the patta. However, in and by the impugned order without any notice or opportunity to the petitioner based on the report of the Village Administrative Officer, the Tahsildar has proceeded to reject the petitioner's application in the online mode.

¶33

I have gone through impugned order and there is no indication of any enquiry conducted or the petitioner being put on notice and being called upon to produce the relevant documents. Without doing so and without giving a fair opportunity to the petitioner, the application has been rejected on the ground that the title deeds and original deeds have not been produced. The said rejection order is clearly violative of the principles of natural justice which are enshrined in the Constitution of India.

¶34

In view of the above and on this limited ground, I am

¶35

inclined to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the fifth respondent for fresh enquiry, after affording a personal hearing to the

¶36

3/5

¶37

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

¶38

W.P.(MD)No.4307 of 2025

¶39

petitioner as well as the seventh respondent. The fifth respondent shall conduct an enquiry in accordance with law and in compliance with the provisions of the Patta Passbook Act and pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶40

In the result, the writ petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶41

Index : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No 19.02.2025 am To

¶42

1.The District Revenue Officer, Trichy District, Trichy.

¶43

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Lalgudi Division, Lalgudi, Trichy.

¶44

3.The Tahsildar, Lalgudi Taluk, Lalgudi, Trichy.

¶45

4/5

¶46

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

¶47

W.P.(MD)No.4307 of 2025

¶48

P.B. BALAJI, J.

¶49

¶50

Order made in W.P.(MD)No.4307 of 2025

¶51

Dated: 19.02.2025

¶52

5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Pr. Mahendran v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pr. Mahendran v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajagiri .P Vs The District Collector

M.Vellaichamy Vs The District Collector

B.Vadivelu Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

R.Muthulakshmi Vs The District Collector

Ganesamoorthi Vs The District Revenue Officer

Fit Person / Thakkar Vs The Sub Collector