ORDER :

1. The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order of the first respondent dated 28.08.2017 passed in NK.14129/2017/E1 and quash the same.

2. Regarding issuance of patta, suffered with an order passed by the Tahsildar dated 22.08.2012, the 4th respondent preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent Revenue Divisional Officer, being the appellate authority under Section 12 of the Patta Pass Book Act, 1983. The said appeal was decided by the 2nd respondent Revenue Divisional Officer by an order dated 28.04.2017. As against which, the petitioner preferred revision before the 1st respondent ie., District Revenue Officer on 13.07.2017. However, the same was rejected through the impugned order dated 28.08.2017, not on merits but only on the point of limitation stating that the said revision filed by the petitioner is barred by limitation. That is the order dated 28.08.2017 passed by the 1st respondent which is impugned in this writ petition.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has invited the attention of this Court to Rule 15 of the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Rules, 1987, which reads thus,

"15. Revision on application - (1) An application under Section 13 to the District Revenue Officer or such officer as may be authorised by the Government in this behalf by Notification for revision of an order passed by the Tahsildar or the appellate authority shall be filed within ninety days from the date of receipt of the order.

(2) The District Revenue Officer or such officer as may be authorised by the Government by the Government may admit an application for revision presented after expiry of the period mentioned in sub-rule(1) if he is satisfied that the party had just and sufficient cause for not presenting it within the said period."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that 90 days period was given under Rule 15(1) for preferring revision under Section 13 of the Act to the District Revenue Officer against the order passed by the Tahsildar or Revenue Divisional Officer concerned under the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act, 1983 (in short 'the Act') and under sub-rule(2) of Rule 15 of the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Rules, 1987 (in short 'the Rules'), even beyond the 90 days period, if there is any delay, that can be condoned entertaining an appropriate petition for condonation of delay explaining the sufficient reason or cause, by the revision petitioner. When that being so, the 1st respondent, through the impugned order, citing a circular dated 04.11.1999, has rejected the revision filed by the petitioner on the ground of limitation and therefore the impugned order would not stand in the legal scrutiny, he contended.

5. Heard Mr.T.Dhanasekaran, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.P.Sathish, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.S.Arjun, learned counsel for the 4th respondent.

6. Learned Additional Government Pleader would contend that, even though 90 days period has been given as limitation for the purpose of filing a revision against the order passed by the Tahsildar or Revenue Divisional Officer under the Act, in view of the circular issued by the Commissioner for Land Administration dated 04.11.1999, where the limitation has been restricted to 30 days, which has also been indicated in the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, which was filed in the revision as impugned before the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent has taken a view that, since the revision has been filed beyond the 30 days time, it is barred by limitation. Therefore, on that ground the impugned order has been passed by the 1st respondent.

7. Similar submissions have been made supporting the impugned order by the learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent.

8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the materials placed on record.

9. Section 13 of the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Bo