Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR, M.JOTHIRAMAN, JJ
Neelavathi – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary to Government, Revenue, Disasters and Mitigation Department, Secretariat, Fort Cerge, Chennai – Respondent
W.P.(MD)No.3030 of 2026 | W.M.P.(MD)No.2502 of 2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner sought mandamus for revision disposal. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court directed action on pending revision. (Para 3) |
(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)
This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the second respondent to dispose the revision petition filed by the petitioner dated
16.10.2025.
2.The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner and other villagers have filed an application before the fourth respondent to take action as against one Rajendran for construction of his house by encroaching the pathway. The said application was dismissed stating that the fourth respondent has constructed his house in his own patta land.
Aggrieved by the said order, an appeal was filed and the same was rejected. The petitioner challenging the same has filed a revision petition before the second respondent. Since the same was not considered, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
2.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner filed the revision before the second respondent, who is not the competent authority to entertain the revision petition. Under Section 10(A)(1) of the Land Encroachment Act, the revision has to be filed before the State Government.
3.Be that as it may, even if the revision is maintainable only before the Government, having entertained the revision, the second respondent either ought to have forwarded the revision to the Government or should have intimated the same to the parties as if he has no jurisdiction to entertain the said revision. Having not chosen either of the option, the second respondent is sitting over the files for all these years. Such an act is highly depreciable. Hence, the second respondent is directed to forward the revision filed by the petitioner to the first respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the first respondent shall dispose of the said revision within a period of three months therefrom.
4.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
