Dhandapani vs The District Revenue Officer
2023 Latest Caselaw 11179 Mad

                                                                          W.P.No.26748 of 2014

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED : 24.08.2023

                                                       CORAM

                            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                               W.P.No.26748 of 2014


                     1.Dhandapani
                     2.Duraisamy                                      ...Petitioners

                                                         Vs.

                     1.The District Revenue Officer,
                       Coimbatore District,
                       Coimbatore.

                     2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
                       Tirupur District.

                     3.The Tahsildar,
                       Avinashi Taluk,
                       Tirupur District.

                     4.Thangavel
                     5.Sengottaiyan
                     6.Subramanian
                     7.Dhandapani
                     8.Kumarasamy
                     9.L.Somasundaram
                     10.A.Rajendran
                     11.A.Somasundaram
                     12.Ramasamy
                     13.N.Subramanian
                     14.S.Sadasivam                                   ...Respondents

                     Page 1 of 5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                        W.P.No.26748 of 2014

                     Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
                     issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating
                     to the impugned order dated 21.06.2013 passed in Na.Ka.No.8421/2009/E1
                     dated 21.06.2013 on the file of the first respondent herein, quash the same
                     and consequently direct the first respondent herein to heard the petitioners
                     and pass orders.
                                        For Petitioners          : Mr.K.Govi Ganesan

                                        For R1 to R3             : Mr.G.Krishna Raja
                                                                   Additional Government Pleader

                                        For R4 to R10            : Mr.N.Manokaran


                                                             ORDER

The order passed by the District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore in

proceeding dated 21.06.2013 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2.The petitioners state that the subject property described in the writ

petition is the ancestral property belonging to the petitioners. The petitioners

derived title through a partition deed and the Tahsildar, Avinashi granted

patta erroneously and therefore, the petitioners submitted an application. The

second respondent Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruppur passed an order in

proceeding dated 08.01.2009 relegating the parties to approach the competent

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.26748 of 2014

civil court of law. The petitioners preferred an appeal before the District

Revenue Officer on 29.11.2012. The District Revenue Officer conducted an

enquiry wherein the petitioners have also given a statement and based on the

records and the statement, the District Revenue Officer passed an order

cancelling the patta granted by the Tahsildar in proceeding dated 10.08.2006

in MDR.No.1993/2006. The District Revenue Officer mainly relied on the

judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court in O.S.No.17/2010 dated

25.10.2010.

3.When the revenue authorities relying on the civil court decree and

passed an order granting patta, cancelling the patta or otherwise, the same

need not be interfered with by the High Court in a writ proceedings. The

petitioners have not preferred any appeal so far against the judgment and

decree passed in the civil suit. If at all any grievance exist, the petitioners

have to approach the competent civil court of law for the purpose of redressal

of their grievances. As as far as the order impugned is concerned, it was

passed by the District Revenue Officer based on the civil court decree and

thus, the writ petition deserves no merit consideration.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.26748 of 2014

4.Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

24.08.2023 cse Index:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes Speaking order

To

1.The District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupur District.

3.The Tahsildar, Avinashi Taluk, Tirupur District.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.26748 of 2014

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

cse

W.P.No.26748 of 2014

24.08.2023

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