Revenue authorities lack the jurisdiction to adjudicate disputed questions of title to immovable property, and any mutation of revenue records remains subject to the outcome of pending civil court proceedings.

ORDER

Mr.D. Ravichander, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1 to 3. By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. Challenging the proceedings of the 1^st respondent in No.13096/2024/A1 dated 18.02.2026, whereby directions were issued for transfer of Patta and correction of revenue records in respect of the land comprised in Survey No.152/5A measuring 0.24 acres situated at Adichapuram Village in favour of the 4^th respondent, this writ petition has been filed.

3. It is stated that the subject property originally belonged to the petitioner’s maternal grandfather, late Mr. L. Kunjuthevar, who had executed a registered Settlement Deed dated 17.02.1971 in favour of the petitioner’s mother, Smt. Anjammal. Thereafter, the property devolved upon the petitioner by way of a registered Release Deed dated 11.07.2019. According to the petitioner, himself and his predecessor-in-title have been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the property for more than 54 years and are cultivating the same.

4. It is further stated that the 4^th respondent had earlier approached the Revenue Divisional Officer, Mannargudi, seeking correction of the survey sub- division number in the revenue records. The said request was considered and rejected by the Revenue Divisional Officer by order dated 08.10.2024, confirming the petitioner’s mother’s name in the Patta relating to Survey No.152/5A. Aggrieved by the same, the 4^th respondent preferred a revision before the 1^st respondent after a delay of more than 210 days, beyond the prescribed period of limitation.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that the 1^st respondent, without conducting any enquiry, without jurisdiction to adjudicate disputed title, and in complete disregard of the concurrent findings rendered by the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents, passed the impugned order directing transfer of patta in favour of the 4^th respondent. Aggrieved by the said order dated 18.02.2026 issued by the

1^st respondent, this writ petition has been filed.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that without jurisdiction, the respondents decided disputed title in respect of immovable property and corrected revenue records. He vehemently argued that the 1^st respondent in complete disregard of the concurrent findings, without conducting proper inquiry or without valid legal reasons passed the impugned order, which is unsustainable and illegal. He further contended that the impugned proceedings were passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and despite the specific intimation regarding the pendency of O.S.No.57 of 2025 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Mannargudi, wherein the very same issue relating to title and possession is the subject matter of adjudication. He strongly pointed out that the revenue authorities have no jurisdiction to decide title disputes relating to immovable property, which domain exclusively falls within the jurisdiction of the competent Civil Court. In view of the above, the impugned order issued by the 1^st respondent dated 18.02.2026 is bad in law and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside as well as he prayed to declare the petitioner as the lawful patta-holder.

7. Per contra, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 submitted that the impugned order has been passed by the 1^st respondent/competent authority based on the materials available on record and after considering the rival claims made by the parties. He further submitted that the proceedings related only to correction of revenue records and do not finally adjudicate title. He also submitted that the p