An administrative order rejecting a property record mutation application must be reasoned and speaking; a vague reference to pending litigation without further details renders the order invalid and subject to judicial review.

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the impugned order passed by the fourth respondent in respect of the petitioner's Patta Transfer Application No. 2025/0103/26/289632, dated 28.05.2025, and consequently direct the fourth respondent to issue patta in the petitioner's name in respect of the properties situated in Survey Nos. 896/1A1, 896/1A2, and 896/1A3, Viluppanur Village, Srivilliputhur Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

2. The petitioner claims rights over the properties comprised in Survey Nos. 896/1A1, 896/1A2, and 896/1A3. Originally, the said properties, along with certain other properties, belonged to Krishnan, S/o. Perumal; Perumal, S/o. Chithiran; Govindhan, S/o. Muthiah Thevar; Marimuthu; Shanmugavel of Viluppanur Village; and others. The properties were originally classified as tharisu (barren lands). For more than 40 years, the said persons had been in possession and enjoyment of the properties and were holding pattas in their names.

3. On 18.03.2004, Krishnan, S/o. Perumal; Perumal, S/o. Chithiran;

Govindhan, S/o. Muthiah Thevar; Marimuthu, S/o. Mariyappan; and Shanmugavel, S/o. Marimuthu, executed a Power of Attorney in favour of one Muthukumar, S/o. Ramakrishnan, in respect of their properties. Thereafter, the said Muthukumar, acting on behalf of his principals, executed a sale deed in favour of Thangamurugan, S/o. K. Rakkappa Pillai, in respect of the aforesaid properties. The said sale deed was registered as Document No. 2720 of 2005. Subsequently, Thangamurugan obtained patta for the said properties under Patta No. 2824, paid the requisite kist, and has been in possession and enjoyment of the same.

4. Thereafter, the petitioner approached R. Thangamurugan with the intention of purchasing the said properties. The petitioner had earlier purchased another property under Document No. 6692 of 2005. Subsequently, the petitioner approached the family members of Murugesan to execute the document. Both parties agreed to sell the said properties for valid consideration. Accordingly, they executed a sale deed dated 12.05.2025, registered as Document No. 327 of 2005.

5. Prior to the registration of the sale deed, the petitioner obtained an Encumbrance Certificate for the period from 01.01.1950 to 21.02.2025 and verified the relevant revenue records. After purchasing the properties, the petitioner submitted an application for transfer of patta. However, the fourth respondent rejected the application stating that a case was pending. Aggrieved by the said rejection, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

6. The contention of the petitioner is that the impugned rejection order merely states that a case is pending before a Court. Another communication issued by the authorities states that an appeal relating to Survey Nos. 896/1A1, 896/1A2, and 896/1A3 is pending before the Revenue Appellate Authority. The respondents have neither disclosed any other reason for rejection nor furnished particulars regarding the pendency of the alleged proceedings. Since the impugned order is a non-speaking order, it cannot withstand judicial scrutiny and is therefore liable to be set aside.

7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 28.05.2025 is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted back to the fourth respondent/Tahsildar. The fourth respondent shall consider the petitioner's application afresh, afford the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing, and thereafter pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

8. With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed o