ORDER :

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the 1st respondent herein pertaining to cancellation of UDR Patta standing in the name of the petitioner vide impugned order dated 12.05.2021 bearing Na.Ka.No.5703/2020/E1 and quash the same.

The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the 1st respondent herein pertaining to cancellation of UDR Patta standing in the name of the petitioner vide impugned order dated 12.05.2021 bearing Na.Ka.No.5703/2020/E1 and quash the same.

2. That the property Punja land to the extent of 16.08 acres at S.No.285/1 at Mopperipalayam Village, Palladam Taluk, Coimbatore District is the subject matter. The said property originally belonged to one Palani Gounder, who settled a Will in favour of the respondents 4 and 5 in 1967 for 1/3rd of the said property i.e., around 5.36 acres. Insofar as the remaining 2/3rd of the property is concerned, the petitioner's predecessor-in-title purchased the said 1/3rd of the property from whom the petitioner sometime in the year 2013, purchased the property. Therefore, he claims right over the 1/3rd of the entire stretch ie., 5.36 acres.

3. Insofar as the 5.36 acres being the 1/3rd of the property purchased by the petitioner, he was able to get a sub division patta of the property concerned in S.No.285/1A and 285/1B.

4. That kind of subdivision made by the revenue authorities was challenged by the private respondents before the District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore, who after having heard both sides, passed an order on 12.05.2021, whereby he has allowed the prayer sought for by the private respondents and passed the following order.

5. Aggrieved over the same, the present writ petition has been filed with the aforesaid prayer.

6. Heard Mr.L.Chandrakumar learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.G.Murugendran learned counsel for the private respondents and Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents.

7. It is the claim of the private respondents that 1/3rd of the property has been bequeathed by way of a Will by Palani Gounder in favour of the private respondents and if out of the remaining land, 1/3rd of the property is purchased by the petitioner from the predecessor-in-title who in turn would have purchased the same from Palani Gounder group, he would be entitled for 5.36 acres and insofar as the boundaries for the 5.36 acres said to have been purchased by the petitioner, there has been no boundaries earmarked in favour of the said land allotted to the private respondents.

8. However, this factor has been denied by the learned counsel for the petitioner and he would submit that the boundary in respect of his portion ie., 5.36 acres he purchased that has been demarcated and that is the reason why the revenue department had subdivided the property into two S.Nos.285/A and 285/B and accordingly patta was issued.

9. When that being the position, the present order passed by the District Revenue Officer dated 12.05.2021 cancelling the subdivision made already and directing to issue joint patta in the name of the petitioner as well as private respondents is infirm according to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

10. However, supporting the said order, the learned Special Government Pleader as well as the learned counsel for the private respondents would contend that, since the boundaries have not been earmarked as to which 1/3rd of the property has been purchased by the petitioner or which portion has been settled in favour of the private respondents, it is for these two people to sit up and to decide by mutually agreeing as to which portion has to be allotted to whom without prejudice to the rights of each other.

11. Hence the order passed by the District Revenue Officer which is impugned herein according to the learned counsel for the private respondents is to be sustained and the priva