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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 18460

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.SURENDER, J
Anand – Appellant
Versus
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Iluppur Taluk, Pudukkottai District. – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 123 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. B.Mahendrarajan
For the Respondents: Mr.D.Sadiq Raja Addl. Govt. Pleader for R1 to R4

The court mandates adherence to procedural fairness in administrative decisions regarding land subdivision.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: Petitioner filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for Writ of Mandamus. Facts of the Case: The petitioner requests to consider an objection against property subdivision in Survey No. 34/10B.

Findings of Court:
The second respondent is directed to consider the claim after inquiry.

Issues: The court determines whether the second respondent would consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation regarding property subdivision.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's reasoning emphasized conducting an inquiry and issuing notices to affected parties before making a decision.

Result: The second respondent shall pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, to be completed within eight weeks.

Table of Content
1. petition filed seeking writ for property objection. (Para 1)
2. court reviews available records. (Para 2)
3. government pleader's remarks; court directs inquiry process. (Para 3)
4. court establishes a timeline for decision-making. (Para 4)

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the first and second respondents to consider the petitioner's objection petition dated 18.02.2026 for not to sub-divided the property in Survey No. 34/10B, Kalingapatti, Iraappusal Village, Iluppur Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 submitted that the second respondent will consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation in accordance with law.

4. In view of the above submission, without going into the merits of the matter, this Court directs the second respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's objection dated 18.02.2026 after conducting an inquiry, which shall include issuing notice to the petitioner, the fifth respondent and any other persons who may be affected and considering any objections submitted by them. The second respondent shall thereafter pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the event of any rival claims, the same shall be agitated before the competent civil court. No costs.

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