Disposed¶28

Annadurai v. The District Collector

Madras HC26 Mar 2026WP(MD)/8125/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

UDR records; UDR Natham FMB Sketch rectification; omission of existing pathway; S.No.445/8, 10 and 11; Thiruppathur Village; Manachanallur Taluk; Trichy District; representation to District Collector vs competent authority; District Revenue Officer; Tahsildar; writ of mandamus; Article 226 Constitution of India; direction to consider representation within four months; Madras High Court Madurai Bench; W.P(MD)No.8125 of 2026; disposed; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with the above directions (fresh representation to the second respondent within four weeks; consideration and appropriate orders by the second respondent within four months); no order as to costs. ¶28

Annadurai Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the respondents to rectify the error in the UDR Natham FMB Sketch by including the existing pathway in respect of S.No.445/8, 10 and 11 at Thiruppathur Village, Manachanallur Taluk, Trichy District, and how the petitioner's pending representations are to be dealt with.

¶20

Court's answer

The court found that the petitioner had submitted his representations to the District Collector and not to the competent authority, the second respondent (District Revenue Officer), and accordingly did not grant the mandamus sought against the other authorities.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is directed to submit a fresh representation to the second respondent within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶27

Key takeaways

On receipt of the fresh representation, the second respondent shall consider it and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four months therefrom.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench (S. Srimathy, J.) disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a writ of mandamus to rectify the error in the UDR Natham FMB Sketch by including an existing pathway said to have been omitted from the UDR records in respect of S.No.445/8, 10 and 11 at Thiruppathur Village, Manachanallur Taluk, Trichy District, pursuant to representations dated 03.12.2021, 08.07.2024 and 31.01.2026. Noting that the petitioner had addressed the representations to the District Collector and not to the competent authority, the District Revenue Officer (second respondent), the court directed the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the second respondent within four weeks, and directed the second respondent to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within four months thereafter. No order as to costs.

¶1

W.P(MD)No.8125 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 26.03.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

¶6

W.P(MD)No.8125 of 2026

Annadurai

... Petitioner

The District Collector, Trichy District.

¶11

The District Revenue Officer, Trichy District.

¶12

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Lalgudi, Trichy District.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Manachanallur, Trichy District. ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to rectify the error crept in UDR Natham FMB Sketch and include the existing pathway in FMB Sketch in respect of S.No.445/8, 10 and 11 at Thiruppathur Village, Manachanallur Taluk, Trichy District by considering the petitioner's representations dated 03.12.2021, 08.07.2024 and 31.01.2026.

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

W.P(MD)No.8125 of 2026

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vinayak For Respondents : Mr.D.Gandhiraj Special Government Pleader

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to rectify the error crept in UDR Natham FMB Sketch by including the existing pathway in FMB Sketch in respect of S.No.445/8, 10 and 11 at Thiruppathur Village, Manachanallur Taluk, Trichy District by considering the petitioner's representations dated 03.12.2021, 08.07.2024 and 31.01.2026.

¶21

The petitioner initially submitted a representation dated 03.12.2021 and

¶22

thereafter sent reminders on 08.07.2024 and 31.01.2026. Since the same have not been considered, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶23

The petitioner claims that a pathway existing in the original FMB has been omitted in the UDR records and seeks rectification of the same. However, the petitioner had submitted the representations to the District Collector and not to the competent authority, the second respondent. Therefore, the petitioner is

¶24

2/4

¶25

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

¶26

W.P(MD)No.8125 of 2026

¶27

directed to submit a fresh representation to the second respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such representation, the second respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four months therefrom.

¶28

4. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be

¶29

no order as to costs.

¶30

26.03.2026

¶31

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes

¶32

jbr

¶33

To: