C.Radhakrishnan vs The District Revenue Officer
2022 Latest Caselaw 14780 Mad

                                                        1

                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                              DATED 05.09.2022

                                                    CORAM

                      THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

                                          W.P(MD)No.21184 of 2022

                C.Radhakrishnan                                                  ... Petitioner
                                                       Vs

                1.The District Revenue Officer,
                  Dindigul District, Dindigul.

                2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
                  Palani, Dindigul District.

                3.The Tahsildar,
                  Vedasandur Taluk Office,
                  Vedasandur, Dindigul District.

                4.Murugan
                5.Rengappan                                                      ...Respondents

                Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
                praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent
                herein to cancel the UDR patta on the name of the fourth and fifth respondents
                herein and further direct the first to third respondents herein to issue the patta
                on the petitioner's name and his brothers and sisters name with regard to
                property in Survey No.723/1 to an extent of 66 cents situated at Ayyalur
                Village, Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District based on his representation dated
                29.06.2022.
                                   For Petitioner :Mr.G.Gomathi Sankar
                                   For Respondents :Mr.D.Gandhiraj
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis                     Special Government Pleader
                                                         2


                                                     ORDER

The Petitioner has prayed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing

the first respondent herein to cancel the UDR patta on the name of the fourth

and fifth respondents herein and further direct the respondents 1 to 3 herein to

issue the patta on the petitioner's name and his brothers and sisters name with

regard to property in Survey No.723/1 to an extent of 66 cents situated at

Ayyalur Village, Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District based on his

representation dated 29.06.2022.

2.Mr.D.Gandhiraj, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for

the official respondents. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken

up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3.The Petitioner's case is that the petitioner's grandfather was in

possession of the property to an extent of 99 cents in Survey No.723/1, situated

at Ayyalur Village, Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District. After the demise of

petitioner's grandfather, his legal heirs, namely, Chinnama Naidu, who is the

father of the petitioner, Muthu Renga and Rengasamy were in possession of the

property. After sometime, the property was partitioned between them due to

some misunderstanding. Thereafter, the brother of the petitioner's father had

executed the registered sale deed in favour of the third party to an extent of 33 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

cents and the remaining 66 cents was in possession of petitioner's father

without any alienation. Meantime, during the UDR Scheme, the entire 99 cents

was wrongly stand in the name of respondents 4 and 5. Taking advantage of

UDR patta, the respondents 4 and 5 had interfered with the petitioner's father'

possession and enjoyment of the property. In this regard, the petitioner's father

filed O.S.No.221 of 200 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate

Court, Vedasandur against the respondents 4 and 5 for the relief of declaration

and injunction and the suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner's father.

Thereafter, no appeal had been filed by the respondents 4 and 5. After the

judgment and decree, the respondents 4 and 5 made an application before

second respondent for issuing of patta in their name. After conducting an

enquiry, the second respondent came to the conclusion that UDR patta was

wrongly entered in the name of the respondents 4 and 5. Then, the petitioner's

father was directed to make an necessary application before the first

respondent. In pursuant to that, his father made an application before the first

respondent on 22.01.2018 and the same was forwarded to the third respondent

for conducting enquiry. As such, the third respondent issued notice to the

petitioner's father and the respondents 4 and 5 and thereafter, no further enquiry

is made and the same is pending. Hence, the Petitioner has approached this

Court seeking interference by this Court.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

4.In view of the above said facts and circumstances, without going into

the merits of the case, this Court directs the first respondent to consider the case

of the Petitioner based on the representation submitted by him on 29.06.2022

and on the basis of documents and materials to be produced by the Petitioner

herein, decide the issue after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner

and other interested parties, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance

with Law, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy

of this order.

5.With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No

costs.

05.09.2022

Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Rmk

To

1.The District Revenue Officer, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani, Dindigul District.

3.The Tahsildar, Vedasandur Taluk Office, Vedasandur, Dindigul District.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J.,

Rmk

W.P(MD)No.21184 of 2022

05.09.2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis