Disposed¶30

Annadurai v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC17 Mar 2026WP/9637/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Annadurai v. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sankagiri Taluk, Salem District & The Tahsildar, Edappadi Taluk — patta transfer / natham land classification; computerised patta; representation dated 08.10.2024 not considered; mandamus under Article 226; direction to pass final orders on merits within 12 weeks after hearing parties; no opinion on merits; disposed, no costs; Salem District; Tamil Nadu revenue records; W.P.No.9637 of 2026; Abdul Quddhose, J.; 17.03.2026.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner's representation dated 08.10.2024, after considering the supporting documents and hearing necessary parties, within twelve weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; no costs. ¶30

Annadurai Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the 1st respondent should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.10.2024 seeking issuance of computerized patta by classifying the property in S.No.57/9, Edappadi Village, Edappadi Taluk, Salem District (2962.5 sq.ft) as natham land in the petitioner's name.

¶12

Court's answer

The Court directed the 1st respondent to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner's representation dated 08.10.2024 seeking issuance of computer patta by classifying the property as natham land in the petitioner's name.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

The final orders are to be passed after giving due consideration to the supporting documents filed by the petitioner and after hearing objections, if any, from all necessary parties whom the 1st respondent deems fit to enquire, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶29

Key takeaways

The Court observed that no prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the petitioner's representation is considered on merits and in accordance with law, and expressly declined to express any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's representation.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Madras (Abdul Quddhose, J.), W.P.No.9637 of 2026, decided 17.03.2026 — Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the 1st respondent (Revenue Divisional Officer, Sankagiri Taluk, Salem District) to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.10.2024 seeking issuance of computerised patta by classifying the petitioner's property in S.No.57/9, Edappadi Village, Edappadi Taluk, Salem District (2962.5 sq.ft.) as natham land in the petitioner's name. As the representation had not been considered, and observing that no prejudice would be caused to the respondents, the Court — without expressing any opinion on the merits — directed the 1st respondent to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law, after due consideration of the supporting documents filed by the petitioner and after hearing objections, if any, from all necessary parties, within twelve weeks from receipt of a copy of the order. Writ petition disposed of; no costs.

¶1

W.P.No.9637 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 17.03.2026

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶6

W.P.No.9637 of 2026

Annadurai

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sankagiri Taluk, Salem District.

¶11

2.The Tahsildar, Edappadi Taluk, Salem District. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1 st respondent to transfer the patta to the petitioner’s property comprised in S.No.57/9, to an extent of 2962.5 sq.ft at Edappadi Village, Edappadi Taluk, Salem District in pursuance of the petitioner’s representation dated 08.10.2024.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Deepak Kumar For Respondents : Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja Government Advocate *****

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the 1^st respondent to

¶16

issue computerized patta by classifying the property as natham land in the

¶17

Page No.1 of 4

¶18

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

¶19

W.P.No.9637 of 2026

¶20

name of the petitioner for the property morefully disclosed in the prayer to this writ petition, based on the petitioner’s representation, dated 08.10.2024, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶21

2. Since the aforesaid representation of the petitioner was not considered, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

¶22

3. Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶23

4. 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, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s representation.

¶24

5. For the foregoing reasons, this Court directs the 1 st respondent

¶25

to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner’s representation, dated 08.10.2024 seeking for issuance of computer patta by classifying the property as natham land for the

¶26

Page No.2 of 4

¶27

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

¶28

W.P.No.9637 of 2026

¶29

property morefully disclosed in the prayer to this writ petition in the name of the petitioner, after giving due consideration to the supporting documents filed by the petitioner and after hearing the objections, if any, from all the necessary parties, whom the 1 st respondent deems it fit to enquire, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶30

6. With the aforesaid direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶31

No costs.

¶32

17.03.2026

¶33

Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No sp

¶34

¶35