Disposed¶34

M.Jagannathan v. the District Collector

Madras HC23 Jul 2026WP/28617/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 226 mandamus; patta after sub division; survey, identify and demarcate land; land acquisition re-conveyance verification; disposal of representation within 8 weeks; notice and opportunity of personal hearing; Irungattukottai village; Sriperumbudur Taluk; SIPCOT Expansion Scheme; Special Tahsildar; Tahsildar; District Collector Kancheepuram; writ petition disposed no cost; Madras High Court 2026.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions to respondents 2 & 3 to verify re-conveyance of the acquired portion to the original owner and thereafter consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 02.09.2025 on merits and in accordance with law, after notice and personal hearing to all concerned, within 8 weeks of receipt of a copy of the order; no costs. ¶34

M.Jagannathan Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should be directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 02.09.2025 seeking identification of the subject land and grant of patta after subdivision. +1 more

¶23

Court's answer

The Court directed respondents 2 & 3 to verify whether the acquired portion of the subject property was re-conveyed to the original owner.

¶33

Ratio / Principle

Thereafter, the representation dated 02.09.2025 is to be considered after issuing notice and affording an opportunity of personal hearing to all concerned parties.

¶33

Key takeaways

The representation is to be disposed of on merits and in accordance with law within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶33
The Court expressly refrained from expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter; the directions were confined to processing the representation.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Krishnan Ramasamy J.), WP No. 28617 of 2026, disposed of by consent at the admission stage on 23-07-2026. Filed under Article 226 seeking a Writ of Mandamus to survey, identify and demarcate Plot No. 1093 in S.Nos. 162/12 and 162/13 of Irungattukottai village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram district, and to grant patta after sub division; the petitioner's representation dated 02.09.2025 had gone unanswered. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court directed respondents 2 & 3 (Tahsildar, Sriperumbudur Taluk and Special Tahsildar, SIPCOT Expansion Scheme) to verify whether the acquired portion of the subject property was re-conveyed to the original owner, and thereafter, after issuing notice and affording a personal hearing to all concerned parties, to dispose of the representation on merits and in accordance with law within 8 weeks of receipt of a copy of the order. No cost.

¶1

WP No. 28617 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 23-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

WP No. 28617 of 2026

¶7

M.Jagannathan S/o. S.Marimuthu, No. 6/2 Kodiidainayagi street, Padmavathi Nagar, Thirumullaivoyal, Chennai 62

¶8

..Petitioner(s)

¶9

¶10

The District Collector Kancheepuram district, Kancheepuram 631501

¶11

the Tahsildar Sriperumbudur Taluk, Sriperumbudur 602 105

¶12

The Special Tahsildar SIPCOT Expansion Scheme, Pillaipakkam Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Sriperumbudur 602 105

¶13

..Respondent(s)

¶14

Prayer:

¶15

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, direction to the respondents to survey, identify and demarcate the property comprised in Plot No. 1093 in S.Nos. 162/12 and 162/13 of Irungattukottai village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram district to grant patta after sub division in favour of the petitioner and to dispose the representation dated 2.09.2025 within a time frame as fixed by this Honble court

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.M.Jagatish

Page1 of 5

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

¶20

WP No. 28617 of 2026

¶21

For Respondent(s): Ms.Inthu Karunakaran, Govt. counsel for R1 & 2

¶22

Order

¶23

This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 02.09.2025.

¶24

Ms.Inthu Karunakaran, learned Government's counsel, takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 & 2.

¶25

By consent of the parties, the main petition is taken up for disposal in the stage of admission itself.

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in this case, the petitioner filed a representation dated 02.09.2025 before the respondent, requesting them to identify the subject land and for issuance of patta after subdivision therein. However, the said representation was not at all considered by the respondents till date. Hence, this petition.

¶27

In reply, the learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the petitioner’s representation will be disposed of within a period of 8 weeks and hence, he requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.

¶28

Page2 of 5

¶29

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

¶30

WP No. 28617 of 2026

¶31

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the respondent and also perused the entire materials available on record.

¶32

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of

¶33

the matter, this Court directs the respondents 2 & 3 to verify as to whether the acquired portion of the subject property was re-conveyed to the original owner. Thereafter, the representation of the petitioner dated 02.09.2025 shall be considered and after issuing notice and affording an opportunity of personal hearing, to all the concerned parties, dispose of the same, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶34