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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 6173

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. SURENDER
S.Vellaisamy – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector – Respondent



##PAGE1##

W.P.(MD) No.1949 of 2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 28.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDER

W.P.(MD) No.1949 of 2026

S.Vellaisamy ... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector,

District Collector Office,

Dindigul District.

2.The District Revenue Officer,

District Collector Office,

Dindigul District.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer,

Revenue Divisional Office,

Dindigul District.

4.The Tahsildar,

Tahsildar East Taluk Office,

Dindigul District. ... Respondents

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to cancel

the patta in Survey Nos.375/2 and 709/1 relating to petitioner's landed

property situated at Periyakottai Village, Dindigul District by considering

petitioner's representation dated 12.12.2025.

_____________

Page No. 1 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/02/2026 04:05:18 pm )

##PAGE2##

W.P.(MD) No.1949 of 2026

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Harish

For Respondents : Mr.D.Sadiq Raja

Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of

Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner’s

representation dated 12.12.2025 and to cancel the patta relating to the

petitioner’s landed property comprised in Survey Nos. 375/2 and 709/1,

situated at Periyakottai Village, Dindigul District.

2. With the consent of the parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for

final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that without the knowledge of

the petitioner, the revenue officials have wrongly and unlawfully issued a

separate patta in favour of a third party, who claims to have purchased the

landed property from one Mariammal. The said Mariammal and the eldest

son of Kasthuri Rengasamy jointly purchased the property measuring an

extent of 5 Acres and 73 Cents, out of which 2 Acres and 86½ Cents was

purchased by the petitioner’s vendor. Out of the said extent of 2 Acres and

_____________

Page No. 2 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/02/2026 04:05:18 pm )

##PAGE3##

W.P.(MD) No.1949 of 2026

86½ Cents, the petitioner purchased 2 Acres and 10 Cents. The property

continued to remain joint and undivided. While the petitioner was issued

patta in his name, the name of the said Mariammal was subsequently

included by way of issuing a joint patta, based on her application,

claiming that she had a ½ share in the original property. However, a

separate patta was later issued without the consent of the other pattadars,

which is illegal. The petitioner submitted several representations,

including the representation dated 12.12.2025, seeking cancellation of the

said patta. However, no action has been taken on the petitioner’s

representation. Therefore, the petitioner has been constrained to file the

present Writ Petition.

4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the

respondents, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner's

representation dated 12.12.2025 would be considered and appropriate

orders would be passed within a period of sixteen weeks.

5. Recording the above submission and without expressing any

opinion on the merits of the matter, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a

direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation

_____________

Page No. 3 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/02/2026 04:05:18 pm )

##PAGE4##

W.P.(MD) No.1949 of 2026

dated 12.12.2025 and pass appropriate orders on its merits and in

accordance with law within a period of sixteen weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this order. The representation shall be disposed of

after conducting an enquiry. The respondents are also directed to provide

a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and any other

interested parties who may be affected by such decision, before passing

any order. All the rival claims regarding the property shall be subject to

the jurisdiction of the Civil Court. There shall be no order as to c

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top