Kangaraj Vs The District Collector

of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the Petitioner’s objection, dated 17.03.2025 and conduct an enquiry into the surveying the lands in S.Nos.328/6A, 328/6B, 329/1B, 349/13B and 328/8 all situated at Navaneethakrishnapuram Village, Veerakeralam Pudur Taluka, Tenkasi District .

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Loganathan For Respondents : Mrs.S.Jeya Priya 1 to 3 Govt. Advocate

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The Petitioner herein seeks a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the Petitioner’s objection, dated 17.03.2025 and conduct an enquiry regarding survey of the lands in S.Nos. 328/6A, 328/6B, 329/1B, 349/13B and 328/8 situated at Navaneethakrishnapuram Village, Veerakeralam Pudur Taluka, Tenkasi District .

¶24

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 and perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶25

2/6

¶26

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

¶27

W.P(MD)NO.7710 of 2025

¶28

3.Though notice was served to the fourth respondent and Mr.M.Sankar, learned counsel entered appearance on behalf of the respondent, vakalath filed by the learned counsel was returned pointing out certain defects. Since no adverse order is passed against the fourth respondent, notice to him is dispensed with

¶29

4.According to the petitioner, the fourth respondent herein filed a Writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.4741 of 2025 seeking survey of the subject property and the said Writ Petition was disposed by directing the official respondents therein to conduct a survey, even without impleading the Petitioner herein as a party respondent therein. It is the case of the Petitioner that patta for the subject property stands in the name of Petitioner’s father Kaliyappa Reddiar and the Petitioner in Patta Nos.866, 1821, 1819 and 1820.Therefore the Petitioner submitted an objection before the respondents, against the survey of the property stands in his name on 17.3.2025.The same has not been considered so far. Hence the Petitioner has come before this Court with the present Writ Petition for the relief stated supra.

¶30

5.Mrs.S.Jeya Priya, learned Government Advocate who appears for the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the objection submitted by the Petitioner will be considered by the

¶31

3/6

¶32

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

¶33

W.P(MD)NO.7710 of 2025

¶34

second respondent in accordance with law, within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶35

6.The fourth respondent obtained an order for survey of the property in W.P(MD)No.4741 of 2025m without impleading the Petitioner herein. Hence said order will not strictly bind the Petitioner. In order to balance the rights of parties, I feel it appropriate to direct the official respondents to consider the objection of the Petitioner in accordance with law. view of the same, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, the second respondent is directed to consider the objection submitted by the Petitioner, dated 17.3.2025 and take a final decision with regard to survey of the subject property, after issuing notice to the Petitioner and fourth respondent, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶36

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

¶37

16.07.2025

¶38

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

¶39

4/6

¶40

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

¶41

W.P(MD)NO.7710 of 2025