Amritlal C.Doshi Vs The Tashildar

to direct the respondents to reinstate patta in the name of petitioners pertaining to survey No.526/1A measuring 06.55 ares and survey No.526/1B measuring 06.70 ares totally measuring an extent of 0.13.55 ares or acre 0.33 cents situated in Vilangadupakkam Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District based on our representation dated 24.11.2025 and for consequential orders.

¶16

For Petitioner(s): Mr.J.Karunanithi For Respondent(s): Mr.D.Ravichander,Spl.G.P.

¶17

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

¶18

WP No. 928 of 2026

¶19

ORDER

¶20

W.M.P. No.1126 of 2026 is ordered subject to the payment of single court

¶21

fee.

¶22

2.This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to re-instate the patta, which was earlier standing in the name of the petitioners for the properties, morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition, based on the petitioners’ representation dated 24.11.2025, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶23

3.The petitioners claim that arbitrarily and illegally the patta, which was earlier standing in the name of the petitioners has now been transferred in favour of one Arulmigu Thirulokianathasamy Temple. The petitioner seeks for cancellation of the same and for restoration of the earlier patta issued in favour of the petitioners for the subject properties. The petitioners had given a representation on 24.11.2025 to the second respondent seeking for cancellation of patta issued in favour of the temple for the subject properties and for restoration of the earlier patta standing in the name of the petitioners. Since the same has not been considered, this writ petition has been filed.

¶24

4.Mr.D.Ravichander, learned Special Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶25

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

¶26

WP No. 928 of 2026

¶27

5.No prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the petitioner’s representation, as stated supra, is considered, on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the objections of the temple in whose favour patta has been issued for the subject properties and any other third party whom the second respondent deems it fit to enquire, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶28

6.This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioners’ representation.

¶29

7.For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the second respondent to pass final orders, on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner’s representation dated 24.11.2025 seeking to re-instate the patta in the name of the petitioners pertaining to the properties, morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition, after hearing the objections of Arulmigu Thirulokianathasamy Temple and also any other third party whom the second respondent deems it fit to enquire, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶30

Vga

¶31

23-01-2026

¶32

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

¶33

WP No. 928 of 2026

¶34

To

¶35

1.The Tashildar Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur