Madras High Court
Anbazhagan vs The District Collector on 30 April, 2021
W.P. No.10946 of 2021
kIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 30.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. BHARATHIDASAN
W.P. No.10946 of 2021
Anbazhagan ... Petitioner
Vs
1. The District Collector,
Nagapattinam,
2. The Thasildar,
Vedaranyam Taluk,
Nagapattinam.
3. Amirthavalli ... Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to hold a full
fledged enquiry and to consider the objection submitted by the petitioner
before effecting change of patta on the representation submitted by the 3rd
respondent strictly as per the law by providing sufficient opportunity to the
petitioner and consider petitioner's objection and pass orders as per the
documents and evidences placed before the respondents 1 and 2.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No.10946 of 2021
For petitioner ... Mr.V. Ramamurthy
For respondents ... Mr. K. Bhuvaneswari,
Addl. Gov. Pleader
for R1 & R2
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the
second respondent to consider the petitioner's objection before effecting
change of patta on the representation filed by the 3rd respondent.
2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is having 3/4
share in Survey No.344/7, Subramaniyankaddu Village, Nagapattinam
District. Earlier, the petitioner has filed a suit in O.S.No.229 of 2004 for
declaration in respect of entire extent on the file of the District Munsif
Court, Nagapattinam, wherein, thel trial Court has clearly held that the
petitioner is having 3/4 share in S.No.344/7 and the appeal filed by the
petitioner in AS.No.4 of 2008 on the file of the Sub Court, Nagapattinam
against the said judgment and decree passed in O.S.229 of 2004 was
dismissed., wherein, the Sub Court, has held that the petitioner and his
brother are having 3/4 share , however, they are not able to prove the extent
of the property they are entitled in S.No.344/7 or S.No.344/7-A. In the
meantime, the 3rd respondent, who is the defendant in the said suit filed an
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No.10946 of 2021
application before the second respondent seeking patta in respect of the land
in Survey No.344/7A and notice was also issued to the petitioner. He
appeared for enquiry. But, the 2nd respondent without considering the
objection raised by the petitioner, proceeding with the enquiry and likely to
pass order. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2
4. The petitioner is only seeking to consider his objection while
considering the application filed by the third respondent seeking patta,in
which, notice was also issued to the petitioner for enquiry and the petitioner
has also raised his objection before the second respondent.
5. In the said circumstances, the second respondent is directed
to conduct enquiry and pass suitable orders on merits and in accordance
with law, after hearing the petitioner as well as the third respondent here
and also considering the objection filed by the petitioner, within a period of
eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No.10946 of 2021
6. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of.
No costs.
30.04.2021
Index: Yes/ No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-speaking Order
mrp
To
1. The District Collector,
Nagapattinam,
2. The Thasildar,
Vedaranyam Taluk,
Nagapattinam.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No.10946 of 2021
V. BHARATHIDASAN, J.
mrp
W.P. No.10946 of 2021
30.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
