SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 67381

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J
Gurusamy – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector – Respondent
Writ Petition | W.P.(MD) Nos.26050 & 26051 of 2025 | W.P.(MD) No.11226 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. R.Tamil Vanan
For the Respondents: Mr.K.Balasubramani

The Revenue Divisional Officer has jurisdiction to conduct inquiries related to land matters, and petitioners can participate by presenting their objections.

Headnote:This judgment addresses the issuance of summons by the Revenue Divisional Officer. The petitioner contests the summons based on a previous order in a related writ petition. The court finds no jurisdictional fault with the Revenue Divisional Officer and allows the petitioner to participate in the inquiry. The court orders the inquiry to be concluded within three months.

Table of Content
1. challenge to summons issued by administrative officer. (Para 1)
2. representation and inquiry process by the respondents. (Para 2)
3. court's ruling on jurisdiction and participation rights. (Para 3)

O R D E R

The summons relating to an inquiry is challenged in this Writ Petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had filed W.P.(MD) No.11226 of 2025 for a survey of land owned by the petitioner and that such Writ Petition was disposed of by an order dated 22.04.2025. Based on the order, learned counsel submits that the survey was conducted. In these circumstances, learned counsel submits that the issuance of the impugned summons is contrary to law.

2. Learned Special Government Pleader accepts notice for respondents 1 to 4. By referring to the earlier order of this Court in W.P. (MD) No.11226 of 2025 and the representation of the fifth respondent before the District Revenue Officer and other revenue officials, he submits that the summons was issued in relation to the inquiry.

3. The challenge is to a summons issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer. The Revenue Divisional Officer is entitled to conduct an inquiry in relation to the grant of patta and other related matters. Since it cannot be said that the Revenue Divisional Officer lacks jurisdiction, I am not inclined to interfere with the summons. Therefore, by leaving it open to the petitioner to participate in the inquiry by raising all contentions and objections, this Writ Petition is disposed of. The Revenue Divisional Officer shall conclude the inquiry and issue a speaking order within three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

NCS : Yes/No 19.11.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd To

1. The District Collector, 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Paramakudi Division, SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY.,J.

apd

3. The Tahsildar, Kadaladi Taluk, 4. The Taluk Surveyor, Kadaladi Taluk, ORDER MADE IN

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top