O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for records in Rc.No.745/LA/CMRL/2022 dated 23.06.2022 on the file of second respondent herein and consequently direct the respondents to acquire the petitioner's property ad-measuring 1360 sq.ft. or part thereon comprised in Old Survey No.749, Survey No.749/5 part, new Survey No.749/6 as per Patta No.555 situated in Karayancavadi, Poonamallee Taluk, Tiruvallur District.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the owner of the property in S.No.749/5 of an extent of 1360 sq.ft. situated in Karayancavadi, Poonamallee. However, joint patta was issued in respect of S.No.749/6 in Patta No.555 in favour of petitioner and his brother. Thereafter, the respondents decided to acquire the petitioner’s property for the purpose of Metro Rail Project, thereby, he made a representaion before the concerned officials for payment of compensation, if the subject property is acquired by the second respondent. However, no orders has been passed by the concerned respondents. While so, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition in W.P.No.7910 of 2022 wherein, this Court, vide order dated 04.04.2022, directed the second respondent to conduct enquiry and pass appropriate orders, pursuant to which, the second respondent conducted the enquiry and rejected the claim of the petitioner, vide impugned order dated 23.06.2022. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the title to the document reveals that the petitioner is the owner of the property in S.No.749/5, however, the Patta was wrongly issued as Patta No.555 in S.No.749/6, instead of S.No.749/5 and when the second respondent decided to acquire the petitioner's proeprty, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition in W.P.No.7910 of 2022, and pursuant to the said order of this Court dated 04.04.2022, the second respondent conducted enquriy. Further, the Tahsildar / third respondent submitted a report dated 16.06.2022 befor the second respondent, wherein, it was clearly mentioned that the property in S.No.749/5 belongs to the petitioner. Without considering the said report submitted by the third respondent and title deed annexed by the petitioner, the second respondent passed the impugned order dated 23.06.2022, which is not sustainable. He further submitted that a mere wrong entry made in the Patta will not deprive the rights of the petitioner to get the compensation in respect of the land owned by him. Therefore, he prayed to allow this Writ Petition.

4. On the above said contentions, this Court heard the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. 5. On a perusal of the materials available on records, it is clear that the petitioner is the owner of the property in S.No.749/5 of an extent of 1360 sq.ft.as per the Sale Deed dated 11.11.1998. When the petitioner came to know about the acquisition proceedings initiated by the second respondent for the purpose of Metro Rail Project, he requested them to fix a fair compensation for his property. Since there was a modification in the Patta in respect of the Survey number of the petitioner as S.No.749/6 instead of S.No.749/5, the second respondent conducted an enquiry and rejected the claim of the petitioner, despite the report submitted by the third respondent dated 16.06.2022 and title deed annexed by the petitioner.

6. In view of the above, since the Patta will not confer the title of the subject property and the documents alone substatiate the title, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 23.06.2022 and remand the matter back to the second respondent to conduct enquiry between the petitioner and the third respondent, and based on the outcome of the said enquiry, the second respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 07.04.2022 and on perusing the documents produced by the petitioner, if the second