Madras High Court
M.Mahalingam vs The District Revenue Officer on 30 January, 2023
W.P(MD)No.1639 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 30.01.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.P(MD)No.1639 of 2023
and
W.M.P(MD)Nos.1483 & 1484 of 2023
M.Mahalingam ... Petitioner
Vs
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Office of the District Revenue Officer,
Madurai District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Thirumangalam Revenue Division at Kappalur,
Madurai District.
3.A.Sakkaiya
4.A.Valli ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the entire records pertaining to
the impugned proceedings of the first respondent Na.Ka.No.G2/30096/2022
dated 28.06.2022 and to quash the same as illegal.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.M.Arumugam
For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Manikkam
Special Government Pleader
for R.1 and R.2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/4
W.P(MD)No.1639 of 2023
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and the
learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents.
2.The petitioner challenges the impugned memorandum dated 28.06.2022
issued by the District Revenue Officer, Madurai. The said memorandum was
already put to challenge by the third respondent herein in W.P(MD)No.22111 of
2022. Vide order dated 20.09.2022, the writ petition is disposed of. Paragraph
No.6 of the order reads as follows:
“6. This Court, after hearing the parties, is of the view
that there was a dispute regarding the title of the property,
which has been gifted by the mother to the petitioner and when
the mutation has been effected in the Patta, the authorities
concerned has not considered the same. But during the
pendency of the civil suit, the authorities concerned issued the
Pattas in favour of the plaintiffs, who are not successful before
the Courts below and the petitioner has to establish his right
over the property. That being the case, the petitioner is directed
to approach the first respondent by giving an explanation as to
why he could not file the said review application within the time
and on receiving the said explanation, the first respondent is
directed to apply his mind and after scrutinising the judgment
and decree passed by the Courts below and pass appropriate
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1639 of 2023
orders in the review application, after holding an enquiry and
giving an opportunity to the parties concerned, regarding the
said mutation, within a period of six months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.”
3.The petitioner herein was not shown as a party in the earlier writ
petition. Be that as it may, the remedy open to the petitioner is to challenge by
filing third party's writ appeal before the Hon’ble Division Bench since he is
aware of passing of the writ order. That apart, the impugned order in my view
does not affect the rights of the writ petitioner. The petitioner can always place
his case before the first respondent and seek rejection of the third respondent’s
revision petition even if it is numbered. The first respondent has not gone into
the merits at all. He had only returned the petition filed by the third
respondent. Therefore, no interference is called for at this stage.
4.Leaving open all the contentions and defenses of the writ petitioner,
this writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
30.01.2023
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
NCC : Yes / No
MGA
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1639 of 2023
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
MGA
To
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Office of the District Revenue Officer,
Madurai District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Thirumangalam Revenue Division at Kappalur,
Madurai District.
W.P(MD)No.1639 of 2023
and
W.M.P(MD)Nos.1483 & 1484 of 2023
30.01.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
