Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 12230 Mad
Judgement Date : 11 September, 2023
W.P.No.26512 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.09.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.26512 of 2023
and
W.M.P.No.25918 of 2023
Mr.Tulsi Das Patel ...Petitioner
Vs
1.The Collector,
Collectorate of Chengalpattu District,
Chengalpattu District.
2.The Revenue Secretary,
Land Registration Department,
Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.
3.The Inspector General of Registration,
No.100, Santhome High Road,
Pattinapakkam,
Chennai – 600 028.
4.The District Registrar,
Office of the District Registrar (Management),
Chengalpattu District.
5.Mr.V.S.Radhakrishnan
6.Mr.Amsavalli ...Respondents
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.26512 of 2023
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records and to
quash the impugned order Ref.No.2989/A3/2023 dated 28.04.2023 along
with the complaint pending on the file of the 4th respondent and consequently
directing the respondents not to entertain further in the Civil Jurisdictional
matter except in due process of law.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.Kanagaraju
For R1 to R4 : Mr.D.Ravichander,
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
The enquiry notice dated 28.04.2023 issued by the District Registrar
under Section 77-A of the Registration Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the
Act') is under challenge in the present writ petition.
2. The petitioner states that the respondents 5 and 6 filed a complaint
before the 4th respondent under Section 77-A of the Act to cancel the
documents of the year 1988, 2002, 2008, 2012 and 2020.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contented that the
amended Section 77-A of the Act cannot be applied retrospectively so as to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.26512 of 2023
cancel the documents registered and executed prior to the amendment.
Retrospective application has not been expressly provided under the
amended Section 77-A of the Act and thus, the District Registrar ought to
have entertained the complaint from the respondents 5 and 6.
4. Nipping at the bud, if at all the circumstance is not desirable, the
authority competent must be allowed to exercise his powers in the manner
contemplated under the Act. It is not as if the enquiry notice must be quashed
merely on one ground or other. The original authority must be provided an
opportunity to adjudicate the issues raised between the parties for the purpose
of forming a final opinion. The parties are at liberty to place the Judgments,
provisions of the Act, defence statements, documents etc., for effective
adjudication of the issues. Contrarily, the High Court cannot conduct a
roving enquiry in respect of all such disputes between the parties under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Thus, the quasi judicial authorities
under the statute must be allowed to exercise their powers in the manner
contemplated under the Act. Intermittent interventions at the initial stage
would cause prejudice to either of the parties to put forth their case based on
the documents and evidences available on record. This exactly is the reason
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.26512 of 2023
why the Courts are declining to entertain writ petitions against the show
cause notices/enquiry notices.
5. By relying on the ratio laid down by the High Court or the Supreme
Court in one Judgment, an enquiry notice or show cause notice cannot be
quashed. Adjudication of all disputed issues by the original Authority is of
paramount importance and in the event of quashing such proceedings in one
ground, it will lead to multiplicity of proceedings, since the aggrieved party
would again file a petition in respect of other grounds raised in his complaint
or otherwise.
6. Therefore, the parties are at liberty to participate in the process of
enquiry, place their defence statements, documents and Judgments, if any,
enabling the authority to adjudicate the issues and pass orders on merits and
in accordance with law. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
11.09.2023 Index:Yes Speaking order Neutral Citation:Yes/No veda/hvk
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.26512 of 2023
To
1.The Collector, Collectorate of Chengalpattu District, Chengalpattu District.
2.The Revenue Secretary, Land Registration Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.
3.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Pattinapakkam, Chennai – 600 028.
4.The District Registrar, Office of the District Registrar (Management), Chengalpattu District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.26512 of 2023
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
hvk
W.P.No.26512 of 2023
11.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!