T.Pughzhendhi Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the report of the second respondent in Na.Ka.A2/00948/2025, dated 00. 07.2025 and grant patta to the petitioner for the property situated in Block No.72 Plot No.3933/7 Tondiarpet, Chennai.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Tamil Selvan For Respondents : Ms.Inthu Karunakaran, Government's Counsel

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the first respondent to consider

¶15

and grant patta to the petitioner for the property situated in Block No.72 Plot

¶16

No.3933/7 Tondiarpet, Chennai, based on the report of the second respondent in

¶17

Page1 of 4

¶18

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

¶19

WP No. 18764 of 2026

¶20

Na.Ka.A2/00948/2025, dated 04.08.2025.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner

¶22

had purchased a property measuring 732 sq. ft. in Block No.72, T.S. No.3933/7 from the legal heirs of on M.K.Govindarajulu vide Document No.759/2002, dated 14.03.2002. However, patta for the said property has been given in the name of another person. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation to the second respondent to change the patta in the name of the petitioner and based on the said representation, survey was conducted by a Surveyor and thereafter, an enquiry was also conducted by the second respondent. Based on the enquiry, a report was sent to the first respondent on 04.08.2025 to take necessary actions accordingly. He further submitted that the petitioner made a further representation on 12.06.2026. However, no action was taken on the report of the second respondent as well as the representation of the petitioner was not considered, as on date. Hence, this writ petition.

¶23

Ms.Inthu Karunakaran, learned Government’s Counsel appearing for

¶24

the respondents submitted that the petitioner’s representation dated 12.06.2025 will be considered within a period of eight weeks.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶26

Page2 of 4

¶27

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

¶28

WP No. 18764 of 2026

¶29

Considering the limited relief sought by the learned counsel for the

¶30

petitioner, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, directs the first respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 12.06.2025, after issuing due notice to the petitioner and other aggrieved persons, if any, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶31