PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd Respondent to issue a patta in the Petitioner's name in respect of the property comprised in Survey Nos. 120/2 to an extent of 0.04.5 Ares situated at Kottur Revenue Village, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District, in the light of the sale deed executed in petitioner favour dated 31.01.2000 vide Document No. 158 of 2000 SRO, Thirumayam, based on the Petitioners representation dated 27.03.2026 within time frame as fixed by this Court.

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the 2nd Respondent to issue a patta in the Petitioner's name in respect of the property comprised in Survey Nos. 120/2 to an extent of 0.04.5 Ares situated at Kottur Revenue Village, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District, in the light of the sale deed executed in petitioner favour dated 31.01.2000 vide Document No. 158 of 2000 SRO, Thirumayam, based on the Petitioners representation dated 27.03.2026 within time frame as fixed by this Court.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the land comprised in Survey No.120/2, measuring an extent of 0.04.5 ares and situated at Kottur Revenue Village, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District, originally belonged ancestrally to one Thavasi. Subsequently, on 31.01.2000, the said Thavasi and his sons executed a registered sale deed in favour of the petitioner for valuable consideration vide Document No.158 of 2000. Further, he submitted that the ancestors of the said Thavasi had formed and constructed a well and a building in the said property and had been carrying on agricultural activities by utilizing the water from the said well. An electricity service connection bearing S.C. No.6 was also obtained in respect of the said property. After the purchase, the petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the property and has been using the well continuously. However, the property was erroneously classified as Government Poramboke in the revenue records, hence the respondent has not issued patta in favour of the petitioner.

3. Heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court directs the 4th respondent to consider the petitioner’s claim for issuance of patta on the basis of the revenue records. In view of the existence of a Will and the admitted agricultural activities carried on in the subject property, the land may not be treated as Government poramboke land. Therefore, classifying the property as Government poramboke may not be justified. Accordingly, the 4th respondent is directed to consider the petitioner’s claim and pass appropriate orders within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With these directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of . No costs