Disposed

S.Jawahar v. The Tahsildar

Madras HC19 Jan 2026WP(MD)/27115/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble Court directed the Tahsildar to consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.10.2019 regarding subdivision anomalies in Survey No.347/1. The Court mandated an enquiry with a reasonable opportunity of hearing to interested persons and disposal within eight weeks, noting the third respondent's failure to file an affidavit.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Tahsildar to consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.10.2019 and dispose of it within eight weeks after conducting an enquiry with an opportunity of hearing.

S.Jawahar Vs The Tahsildar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.27115 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 19.01.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.27115 of 2019

S.Jawahar

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Tahsildar,

¶11

Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul.

¶12

2.The Firka Surveyor

¶13

(In-charge of Siluvathur Village), Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶14

3.The Village Administrative Officer, Siluvathur Village, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District.

4.V.Sivakami

(Anganvaadi Worker)

5.R.Natarajan

(Retired Forest Officer)

¶19

6.Lakshmi

¶20

7.Veeramalai Aasari

¶21

8.A.Dhandapani Aasari

¶22

Page No. 1 of 7

¶23

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

¶24

W.P.(MD) No.27115 of 2019

¶25

9.C.Palanichamy (Retired Postman)

10.Aavaliammal

11.Mayakkal

12.Ponnar Aasari

13.Santhanam

14.Thangavel Asari

15.V.Ponnusamy Aasari

16.R. Selvaraj

17.Dhanapaul

18.C.Kannan

19.N. Soundharam ... Respondents

¶36

[R4 to R19 are impleaded vide order dated 08.09.2022 passed in W.M.P. (MD) No.2856 of 2020]

¶37

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's petition dated 15.10.2019 in respect of the sub divisions effected in Survey No.347/1 in Siluvathur Village, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District and rectify the same by conducting appropriate enquiry involving all the interested persons and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law within a stipulated time.

¶38

For Petitioner : Mr.H.Lakshmi Shankar

¶39

Page No. 2 of 7

¶40

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

¶41

W.P.(MD) No.27115 of 2019

¶42

For R1 to R3 : Mr.B.Ramanathan

¶43

Additional Government Pleader

¶44

For R4, R5, R6, R7, R11 to R13, R15, R16 & R19: No appearance

¶45

O R D E R

¶46

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner’s petition dated 15.10.2019 relating to the subdivisions effected in Survey No.347/1, situated at Siluvathur Village, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District and to rectify the same by conducting an appropriate enquiry, after affording an opportunity to all interested persons and to dispose of the said petition on merits and in accordance with law within a stipulated time.

¶47

This Court, by an interim order dated 02.09.2024, directed the

¶48

third respondent, the Village Administrative Officer, to file an affidavit explaining the anomaly in the revenue records. On 05.01.2026 also, this Court directed the third respondent to file the affidavit as directed in the earlier order.

¶49

Page No. 3 of 7

¶50

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

¶51

W.P.(MD) No.27115 of 2019

¶52

Today, when questioned, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first to third respondents submitted that the then Village Administrative Officer was arrested in a bribery case and therefore, the affidavit could not be filed.

¶53

This Court, in the interim order dated 02.09.2024, found that there was an anomaly in the revenue records while subdividing the survey and consequently in the FMB. The relevant portion of the said interim order dated 02.09.2024 reads as under:

¶54

“ Despite documents in the form of a patta of the year 2013 at Page No.21 of the typed set of papers filed by the petitioner and at Page No. 24, printed in the year 2019, where the names of the petitioner and his brother have been reflected as pattadhars, the 'A' Register which has been produced for the scrutiny of this Court shows the name of the predecessor in title one Kattaiyan. The third respondent has committed an error while subdividing S.No.347/1 and consequently in the FMB. ”

¶55

____________ Page No. 4 of 7_

¶56

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

¶57

W.P.(MD) No.27115 of 2019

¶58

5. Though the said order was passed by this Court on 02.09.2024 directing the third respondent to file an affidavit explaining the anomaly in the revenue records, no steps have been taken to file the affidavit till date. Since, prima facie , it appears that the third respondent, namely the Village Administrative Officer, committed an error while subdividing Survey No.347/1 and consequently in the FMB, it is appropriate to direct the first respondent, the Tahsildar, to consider the representation dated 15.10.2019 submitted by the petitioner regarding the subdivisions effected in Survey No.347/1.

¶59

6. Accordingly, the first respondent is directed to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 15.10.2019, taking into consideration the fact that the subdivision was effected without putting the petitioner on notice, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The said representation shall be disposed of after conducting an enquiry. The first respondent is also directed to afford reasonable opportunity during such enquiry to the petitioner, the private respondents, and any other persons who may be affected by such decision.

¶60

____________ Page No. 5 of 7_

¶61

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

¶62

W.P.(MD) No.27115 of 2019

¶63

7. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No

¶64

costs. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶65

[K.SURENDER, J.] 19.01.2026

¶66

JEN

¶67

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No

¶68

¶69

1.The Tahsildar, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul.

¶70

2.The Firka Surveyor (In-charge of Siluvathur Village), Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶71

3.The Village Administrative Officer, Siluvathur Village, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶72

Page No. 6 of 7

¶73

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

¶74

W.P.(MD) No.27115 of 2019

¶75

K.SURENDER, J.

¶76

JEN

¶77

W.P.(MD) No.27115 of 2019

¶78

19.01.2026

¶79

____________ Page No. 7 of 7_

¶80

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

S.Jawahar v. The Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Jawahar v. The Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D.Rajini Vs The District Collector

Subash Chandra Bose K Vs The District Collector

A.Lashmanan Vs The Collector

Jayabalan Vs R. Ananthi

Ganesan. T Vs The Commissioner

Pappathy Vs The Tahsildar