Petitioner's rights to be heard upheld in property subdivision matters.

Order

This writ petition has been filed, challenging the impugned order dated 10.12.2025 passed by the first respondent.

2.The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that she was not heard by the Revenue Divisional Officer and hence, the impugned order dated 10.12.2025 passed by the first respondent (The District Revenue officer)

has got to be quashed.

3.However, as seen from the impugned order dated 10.12.2025 passed by the first respondent, the petitioner's interest has been adequately protected. The first respondent has directed the Tahsildar to conduct a fresh subdivision of the property, based on the supporting documents produced by the petitioner as well as the private respondents. The petitioner has also been afforded an opportunity to raise all objections before the Tahsildar for fresh subdivision.

4.This Court is not interfering with the impugned order.

5.Even though the Revenue Divisional Officer may not have afforded an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the District Revenue officer, in the impugned order dated 10.12.2025, has safeguarded the rights of the petitioner to raise all objections before the Tahsildar by producing all the relevant documents. In such circumstances, the question of quashing the impugned order dated 10.12.2025 passed by the first respondent does not arise.

6.To protect the interest of the petitioner, the only limited relief that can be granted by this Court in this writ petition is to direct the Tahsildar concerned to issue notice to the petitioner before making the subdivision of the property, morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition and only after hearing the objections of the petitioner through her supporting documents, the Tahsildar concerned shall complete the subdivision of the property. The Tahsildar shall also hear the objections of the rival parties, who are the private respondents in this writ petition.

7.For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the Tahsildar, Nambiyur Taluk to issue notice to the petitioner prior to the subdivision of the property, morefully described in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition and after hearing the objections of the petitioner and the private respondents, the Tahsildar, Nambiyur Taluk shall complete the subdivision of the property by adhering to the principles of natural justice.

8.The Tahsildar, Nambiyur Taluk shall give due consideration to the objections raised by the petitioner as well as the private respondents and the supporting documents produced by them and only thereafter, shall complete the subdivision of the property.

9.Since the Tahsildar, Nambiyur Taluk is not a party respondent in this writ petition, this Court, by exercising its suo motu powers, impleads the Tahsildar, Nambiyur Taluk as the party sixth respondent in this writ petition.

The Registry is directed to carry out the necessary amendment.

10.Mr.D.Ravichander, learned Special Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the first respondent and the newly impleaded sixth respondent as well. Since no adverse order is being passed against respondents 2 to 5, notice to respondents 2 to 5 is dispensed with by this Court.

11.The newly impleaded sixth respondent shall complete the aforesaid exercise of subdivision of the property, by adhering to the directions issued by this Court, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected WMP is closed. No costs.