BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 12.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDER and W.M.P.(MD) No.2544 of 2026 K.Saravanakumar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2.The District Revenue Officer, Madurai, Madurai District.

3.The Tahsildar, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to mutate the Patta No.446 in the name of petitioner's grandfather V.Karuppanna Thevan in Survey No.264/2, to an extent of 1.74 Acres and Survey No.263/4, to an extent of 61 Cents, at Latchimipuram Village, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 11.11.2024 and the proceedings of the third respondent in proceedings in Na.Ka.No.244/2025/Aa1, dated 19.08.2025.

[Prayer was amended vide order of this Court dated For Petitioner : Mr.M.Solaisamy For Respondents : Mr.R.Ragavendran Government Advocate

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to mutate/transfer Patta No.446 in the name of the petitioner’s grandfather, V.Karuppanna Thevan, in respect of the lands in Survey No.264/2, measuring an extent of 1.74 acres and Survey No.263/4, measuring an extent of 61 cents, situated at Latchimipuram Village, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District, by considering the petitioner’s representation dated 11.11.2024 and the proceedings of the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.244/2025/Aa1, dated 19.08.2025. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the subject property was allotted to the petitioner’s grandfather by way of family arrangement and thereafter it came into the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner’s father. However, during the UDR scheme, the respondents failed to record their names in the revenue records and no patta was issued in their favour. The petitioner has been taking continuous steps to have the revenue records mutated. Though the third respondent, after conducting an enquiry, by proceedings dated 19.08.2025 confirmed the petitioner’s right over the property, the patta has not been transferred in the name of the petitioner’s grandfather, his father or the petitioner. The petitioner had also submitted a representation dated 11.11.2024, which has not evoked any response. Hence, the petitioner has been constrained to file the present Writ Petition.

3. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner's representation dated 11.11.2024 would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed by the third respondent within a period of twelve weeks.

4. 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 third respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 11.11.2024, conduct enquiry and pass appropriate orders on its merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The third respondent is 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. There shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

[K.SURENDER, J.]

12.02.2026 JEN Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No To

1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2.The District Revenue Officer, Madurai, Madurai District.

3.The Tahsildar, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District.

K.SURENDER , J .

JEN

12.02.2026