Revenue authorities must act on representations seeking duplicate patta under land reforms assignment within reasonable time.

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Sankili ... Petitioner Vs

1. The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Usilampatti, Madurai District. 3. The Tahsildar, Peraiyur Taluk Office, Peraiyur, Madurai District. ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 2^nd and 3^rd respondent to issue patta in favour of petitioner in respect of Survey No.71/2C, for an extent of 0.94.5 Hectors (1 Acre 86 Cents) is situated at Seadapatti Village, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District, on basis of petitioner's representation dated 25.09.2025 within time frame fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Vadivelan For R-1 to R-3 : Mr.SRA.Ramachandran, Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 2 and 3to issue patta in favour of petitioner in respect of Survey No.71/2C, for an extent of 0.94.5 Hectors (1 Acre 86 Cents) is situated at Seadapatti Village, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District, on basis of petitioner's representation dated 25.09.2025.

2. The petitioner has filed an affidavit stating that he is an agricultural coolie and that the land comprised in S.F. No. 71/2, to a total extent of 3.29.0 hectares, was taken over by the Government under the Land Ceiling Act and distributed to landless poor persons to promote equality. The petitioner is one of the beneficiaries under the Land Reforms Act. He was assigned agricultural land measuring 1 acre and 86 cents through proceedings dated 31.01.1995. As per the terms of assignment, the petitioner remitted the land value fixed by the Assignment Officer. Subsequently, an “F” patta was issued in his favour in respect of the said property, and he has been in possession and enjoyment of the same. However, the petitioner lost the original “F” patta. Hence, he submitted an application dated 30.01.2021 seeking issuance of patta in respect of the said land.

Though the Village Administrative Officer conducted an enquiry and submitted a report, no further steps were taken by the respondents. Hence, the present Writ Petition has been filed. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. The learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the land originally belonged to S.K.N.K.R.K. Kamanayaickar and was subsequently taken over under the Land Reforms Act and distributed to several persons. One such allotment was made to the petitioner’s father, Seeniraman. The petitioner, being the son of Seeniraman, has filed the present Writ Petition. After the demise of Seeniraman, the petitioner and his brother inherited the property, and a joint patta was issued in their names. However, the petitioner is now seeking a separate patta for his share of the property.

4. The learned Additional Government Pleader further submitted that proceedings were sent by the Tahsildar to the Revenue Divisional Officer, where it has been stated as under:

“Nkwg; b Gy vz; 71/2C - 0.94.5 (Vh]; ); epyjj; pyp 1.86 nrzl; ; epyjj; pwF; kDjhuh; rqf; pyp vdg; tUfF; MRIV/319/PYR ehs;: 31.01.1995-d; gb “F” gll; h toq;Ftjwf; hd cjj; uT toqf; gg; lL; “F” gll; h ngwW; ss; hh;. Nkwg; b “F” gll; hit kDjhuh; jtwtplL; s;shh.; jwN; ghJ kDjhuhplk; “F” gll; h ,yi; y. Kdjhuhh; Nkwg; b epyjj; pwF; epyf;

fpuaj; njhif nrYjj; pajwf; hd urPJ itj;Jss; hh;. Gyjj; zpf;if nraa; gg; ll; jpy; kDjhuh; “F” gl;lh ngw;wJ Kjy; jwN; ghJ tiu tptrhak; nra;J tUtjhf tprhuizapy; njhpa tUfpwJ. Nkwg; b epyjj; py ; tpjp kPwyf; s ; Vjkpy;iy.”

5. In view of the above, the respondents are directed to consider the petitioner’s representation in the light of the above proceedings and observations