Disposed¶34

S. Kanniyammal v. The District Revenue officer

Madras HC6 Jul 2026WP/25086/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

UDR scheme record correction mandamus; time-bound direction to District Revenue Officer Kanchipuram to conclude Na.Ka.No. 427/2025/Aa3 and pass final orders within 6 weeks; 34 cents Survey No.343/6B Naduveerapattu Village Kundrathur Taluk; patta/revenue mutation follow-up to W.P. No.8775 of 2024 and Contempt Petition No.3784 of 2025; disposed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus direction issued: the first respondent (District Revenue Officer, Kanchipuram) is directed to complete the UDR correction proceedings for the petitioner's property in Survey No.343/6 and pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law within six weeks of receipt of the order; Writ Petition disposed of with no order as to costs. ¶34

S. Kanniyammal Vs The District Revenue officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent (District Revenue Officer) to conclude the proceedings in Na.Ka.No. 427/2025/Aa3 for correction of the UDR in respect of the petitioner's property (34 cents, Survey No. 343/6, subdivided as 343/6B, Naduveerapattu Village, Kundrathur Taluk) and pass final orders within a time frame stipulated by the Court.

¶21

Court's answer

This Court directs the first respondent (District Revenue Officer) to complete the UDR correction proceedings concerning the petitioner's property in Survey No.343/6, Naduveerapattu Village, Kundrathur Taluk, Kanchipuram District.

¶33

Ratio / Principle

The first respondent shall pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Krishnan Ramasamy, J.), WP No. 25086 of 2026, decided 06-07-2026: Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Petitioner, absolute owner of 34 cents with residential house in Survey No.343/6 (subdivided as 343/6B), Naduveerapattu Village, Kundrathur Taluk (purchased under registered Sale Deed dated 10.07.1983), sought conclusion of pending UDR correction proceedings in Na.Ka.No. 427/2025/Aa3 after earlier litigation trail — W.P. No.8775 of 2024 (Court order dated 02.04.2024 to consider her representation), Contempt Petition No.3784 of 2025 (closed 12.01.2026 with direction to pass final orders after the Tahsildar admitted erroneous third-party recording of the land under the UDR Scheme), and a DRO enquiry of 05.02.2026 at which original title deeds were produced, yet no final order issued. Directing completion of the UDR correction proceedings by the first respondent (District Revenue Officer, Kanchipuram) with orders to be passed on merits and in accordance with law within six weeks from receipt of the order; petition disposed of, no costs.

¶1

WP No. 25086 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 06-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

WP No. 25086 of 2026

¶7

S. Kanniyammal W/o.Seenivasan No.3/277 Ettiyamman Kovil Street Ettiyapuram, Naduvverapattu Village Chennai District 600132.

¶8

..Petitioner(s)

¶9

¶10

The District Revenue officer Kanchipuram District.

¶11

The Revenue Divisional Officer Sriperumbudur Kanchipuram District.

¶12

The Tahsildar Kundrathur Kanchipuram District.

¶13

..Respondent(s)

¶14

PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1^st respondent to conclude the proceedings in Na.Ka.No. 427/2025/Aa3 for correction of the UDR in respect of the Petitioners property to an extent of 34 cents comprised in Survey No. 343/6 (subdivided as 343/6B) situated at Naduveerapattu Village,

¶15

Page1 of 5

¶16

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

¶17

WP No. 25086 of 2026

¶18

Kundrathur Taluk, Kancheepuram District and pass final orders thereon within a time frame to be stipulated by this Court.

¶19

For Petitioner(s): Mr. G. Balamanikandan For Respondent(s): Ms.Inthu Karunakaran Government Counsel

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking seeking the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1^st respondent to conclude the proceedings in Na.Ka.No. 427/2025/Aa3 for correction of the UDR in respect of the petitioner’s property to an extent of 34 cents comprised in Survey No. 343/6 (subdivided as 343/6B) situated at Naduveerapattu Village, Kundrathur Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

¶22

The case of the petitioner is that she is the absolute owner and possessor of 34 cents of land with a residential house in Survey No.343/6, Naduveerapattu Village, Kundrathur Taluk, Kanchipuram District, having purchased the property under a registered Sale Deed dated 10.07.1983. Despite repeated representations seeking issuance of patta, the respondents failed to take action. Consequently, the petitioner filed W.P. No.8775 of 2024, wherein this Court, by order dated 02.04.2024, directed the authorities to consider the

¶23

Page2 of 5

¶24

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

¶25

WP No. 25086 of 2026

¶26

petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders. As the said direction was not complied with, the petitioner initiated Contempt Petition No.3784 of 2025. During the contempt proceedings, the Tahsildar admitted that the petitioner's property had been erroneously recorded in the name of a third party under the UDR Scheme and recommended rectification of the revenue records by mutating the petitioner's name. Based on the said submission, the contempt petition was closed on 12.01.2026 with a direction to pass final orders. Though the District Revenue Officer thereafter conducted an enquiry on 05.02.2026 and the petitioner produced all original title documents, no final order has been passed till date. Aggrieved by the inaction of the first respondent, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.

¶27

The learned Government Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the third respondent (Tahsildar) has already sent a report to the first respondent (District Revenue Officer). He further submitted that the first respondent would complete the proceedings within any timeline fixed by this Court.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶29

Page3 of 5

¶30

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

¶31

WP No. 25086 of 2026

¶32

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions

¶33

made on either side, this Court directs the first respondent (District Revenue Officer) to complete the UDR correction proceedings concerning the petitioner’s property in Survey No.343/6, Naduveerapattu Village, Kundrathur Taluk, Kanchipuram District. The first respondent shall pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶34