Madras High Court
Krishnan vs The District Revenue Officer on 11 March, 2021
W.P.(MD)No.5287 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 11.03.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN
W.P.(MD) No.5287 of 2021
Krishnan .. Petitioner
Vs
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Kumbakonam,
Thanjavur District.
3.The Sub Collector,
Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.
4.The Executive Officer,
Sri Saranatha Perumal Temple,
Sri Saranatha Perumal Devasthanam,
Thirucherai 612 605,
Kumbakonam Taluk,
Thanjavur District. .. Respondents
PRAYER:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records of the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.5590/2017/A3, dated
1/6
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD)No.5287 of 2021
24-06-2020 and quash the same and consequently directing the 2nd
respondent to grant patta in favour of the petitioner, relating to the
petitioner's lands in S.Nos.49/22 (Old S.No.49/2 Part), 49/43, and 49/42 ,
(old S.No.49/3) situate at Thirucherai Village, Kumbakonam Taluk
Thanavur District.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan
ORDER
The case of the petitioner is that he has filed a petition for grant
of patta for the land in S.Nos.49/22 (Old S.No.49/2 Part), 49/43 and
49/42 (Old.S.No.49/3), situated at Thirucherai Village, Kumbakonam
Taluk, Thanjavur District to the 3rd respondent. The 4th respondent
appears to have filed a suit in O.S.No.167 of 2001 praying for the relief
of declaration and permanent injunction as against the petitioner herein
before the District Munsif Court, Valangaiman at Kumbakonam. The suit
was dismissed by the trial Court on 13.03.2008. As against the same, the
4th respondent has preferred an appeal in A.S.No.31 of 2010 before the
Principal Sub Court, Kumbakonam, which was also dismissed on
30.03.2016. The 4th respondent filed yet another suit in O.S.No.68 of
2006 and the suit was also dismissed on 01.11.2007.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD)No.5287 of 2021
2.The 3rd respondent, in respect of the application filed by the
petitioner for grant of patta, rejected the same on the ground that there is
an appeal pending as against the dismissal of the judgment passed in
O.S.No.68 of 2006 and the petitioner was also advised to file a revision
before the 1st respondent. The petitioner thereafter preferred a revision
before the 1st respondent under Section 14 of the Tamilnadu Patta
Passbook Act, 1983 and the revision being not disposed of by the 1 st
respondent, he was before this Court in W.P.(MD) No.13872 of 2019.
This Court disposed of the writ petition on 20.06.2019 by giving a
direction to the 1st respondent to dispose of the revision petition filed by
the petitioner within a period of six weeks.
3.In pursuance of the above direction of this Court, the 1 st
respondent passed appropriate orders in the revision petition on
18.10.2019 by remanding the matter back to the 2nd respondent for proper
disposal within a period of 3 weeks. In pursuance of the same, the 2 nd
respondent by proceedings dated 24.06.2020, rejected the petitioner's
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD)No.5287 of 2021
request on the ground that a case is pending before this Court in W.P.
(MD)SR.No.37210 of 2016 and an appeal before the learned Subordinate
Judge, Kumbakonam as against the judgment in O.S.No.68 of 2006 is
pending. As against the order dated 24.06.2020, the petitioner is before
this Court.
4.From the above narrative, it could be seen that the petitioner
is aggrieved by the order of the 2nd respondent and as against the same,
an effective alternative remedy is available by way of filing a revision
before the 1st respondent under the provisions of the Tamilnadu Patta
Passbook Act, 1983. Without exhausting the alternative remedy that is
made available in the Act, it is certainly not open to the petitioner to rush
to this Court at this stage.
5.This Court has time and again held that in respect of patta
matters, proper remedies that are made available in the Act need to be
exhausted as the Revenue Authority alone is the competent authority to
pass appropriate orders in respect of grant, transfer and change of patta
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD)No.5287 of 2021
etc. Unless all the remedies are exhausted, the writ petition cannot be
entertained by this Court even assuming that the same is maintainable
only after the exhaustion of the remedies under the Act. In any event, as
far as the case on hand is concerned, the petitioner has not exhausted the
revisional remedy available under the Act and therefore, this writ petition
cannot be entertained by this Court at this stage.
6.For the above said reasons, the writ petition stands dismissed.
No costs.
Index : Yes/No 11.03.2021
Internet : Yes/No
mm
To
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Kumbakonam,
Thanjavur District.
3.The Sub Collector,
Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD)No.5287 of 2021
V.PARTHIBAN, J.
mm
W.P.(MD)No.5287 of 2021
11.03.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
