Dismissed¶5

S.Chandra Sekar v. The District Collector / Monitoring Committee

Madras HC26 Mar 2026WP(MD)/19460/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.(MD)No.19460 of 2025; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; 26.03.2026; N. Sathish Kumar J. and M. Jothiraman J.; writ of mandamus under Article 226; recovery of Government land; cancellation of patta; pathway dispute; S.No.756 Samugarengapuram Village, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District; representation dated 08.05.2025; 'A' register; Tharisu; 1989 subdivision and computer patta by Tahsildar; not a PIL; private rights; alternative remedy; appeal before District Revenue Officer; party-in-person petitioner S. Chandra Sekar; J. Ashok Addl. Govt. Pleader; dismissed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

The grievance concerns a pathway blocked by private individuals who hold patta; it is not a Public Interest Litigation but an attempt to establish private rights. ¶4

S.Chandra Sekar Vs The District Collector /… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶5

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents 1 and 2 should be directed to recover the Government land in S.No.756, Samugarengapuram Village, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District, by cancelling the patta granted to private individuals, so that farmers and the public are not blocked from using it as a pathway. +1 more

¶opening (unnumbered)

Ratio / Principle

The grievance concerns a pathway blocked by private individuals who hold patta; it is not a Public Interest Litigation but an attempt to establish private rights.

¶4

Key takeaways

One aggrieved by the grant of patta to private individuals has the proper remedy of challenging the patta by filing an appeal before the District Revenue Officer; the writ petition is therefore not the appropriate route.ratio¶4
The Court found no merit in the writ petition and held it liable to be dismissed; it was accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.ratio¶4

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), W.P.(MD)No.19460 of 2025, decided 26.03.2026 (N. Sathish Kumar, J., authoring; M. Jothiraman, J., concurring): A writ petition under Article 226 sought a mandamus directing the District Collector and District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli, to recover Government land in S.No.756, Samugarengapuram Village, Radhapuram Taluk, by cancelling patta allegedly granted to private individuals, so that the land remains available as a pathway, pursuant to the petitioner's representation dated 08.05.2025. The Additional Government Pleader stated that the 'A' register recorded the land as 'Tharisu' and that after a 1989 subdivision computer patta was issued by the Tahsildar for the land allotted in 1989, so no violation occurred. The Court held the matter to be a private pathway/patta dispute, not a Public Interest Litigation, and that the petitioner's proper remedy was to challenge the patta by appeal before the District Revenue Officer. Finding no merit, the Court dismissed the writ petition with no order as to costs.

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.19460 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 26.03.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.19460 of 2025

S.Chandra Sekar

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector/Monitoring Committee (Tirunelveli), O/o. District Collector Office, Tirunelveli.

¶11

2.The District Revenue Officer, O/o. District Revenue Office, Tirunelveli.

¶12

3.The Tashildhar, O/o. Tahsildhar Office, Radhapuram.

¶13

4.The Sub Registrar, O/o. Sub Registrar Office, Radhapuram.

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to recover the Government land by cancel the patta and issue an

¶16

1/6

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.(MD)No.19460 of 2025

¶19

order for not to block the formers and public people from using government land as pathway of S.No.756 Samugarengapuram Village, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 08.05.2025.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Chandra Sekar (Party-in-Person) For Respondents : Mr.J.Ashok, Addl. Govt. Pleader

¶21

ORDER

¶22

(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)

¶23

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to recover the Government land by cancelling the patta and issue an order for not to block the formers and public people from using Government land as pathway of S.No.756

¶24

Samugarengapuram Village, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 08.05.2025.

¶25

2 . According to the petitioner, originally the subject property

¶26

was shown as Government property and later, patta was suddenly granted to some private respondents by the Tahsildar. The petitioner has

¶27

2/6

¶28

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

¶29

W.P.(MD)No.19460 of 2025

¶30

already sent a representation dated 08.05.2025 to the respondents, seeking action to recover the Government property. However, no action has been taken by the respondents so far. Hence, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.

¶31

3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that as per the 'A' register, the subject property has been mentioned as 'Tharisu'. Thereafter, in the year 1989, the subject property was subdivided and computer patta was issued by the Tahsildar for the land allotted in 1989. Therefore, no violation has occurred as alleged by the petitioner. Hence, prays for dismissal of this Writ Petition.

¶32

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the issue in this Writ Petition is with regard to a pathway dispute. According to the petitioner, the pathway has been blocked by the private individuals, who hold the patta. It clearly shows that there is no Public Interest Litigation and it is only an attempt to establish the private rights. If at all, the petitioner is aggrieved by the grant of patta to the private individuals, the proper remedy is to challenge

¶33

3/6

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.(MD)No.19460 of 2025

¶36

the patta by filing an appeal before District Revenue Officer. Hence, we do not find any merit in this Writ Petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶37

5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be

¶38

no order as to costs.

¶39

[N.S.K., J.] & [M.J.R., J.] 26.03.2026 Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No

¶40

vsm

¶41

4/6

¶42

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