Madras High Court
A.Nirmala vs The Tahsildhar on 10 February, 2025
Author: N.Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N.Anand Venkatesh
W.P.No.3957 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 10.02.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.No.3957 of 2025
A.Nirmala .. Petitioner
vs
The Tahsildhar
Coimbatore (North), Coimbatore Taluk
Coimbatore District. .. Respondent
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, seeking a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
records relating to File No.2023/0103/12/503911 dated
26.10.2023 on the file of the respondent and quash the same as
illegal, arbitrary, null and void and further direct the respondent
to sub-divide and grant patta in the name of the petitioner for the
land belonging to her and situated in Kurudampalayam Village
and comprised in present Patta No.1867 and S.No.69 Dry
measuring an extent of one acre.
Page No.1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3957 of 2025
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Subramanian
For Respondent : Mr.A.Selvendran
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned
proceedings of the respondent dated 26.10.2023 and for a
consequential direction to the respondent to sub-divide and grant
patta in the name of the petitioner in respect to the subject
property within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. Heard Mr.S.Subramanian, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government
Pleader for the respondent.
3. The petitioner is claiming the right and title over the
subject property. Shri.Viruntheeswarar Temple was also claiming
right over the property and a suit was filed in O.S.No.20 of 1997
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
before the District Munsif Court, Coimbatore. Ultimately, the case
ended before this Court in S.A.No.585 of 2007. This Court, by the
judgment and decree dated 17.08.2021, confirmed the judgment
and decree passed by the Trial Court as well as the Appellate
Court, dismissing the suit.
3. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner filed an application
seeking patta. The same has been rejected without assigning any
reasons and by merely stating that a counter claim has been
made by the Temple and the Hindu Religious & Charitable
Endowments (HR & CE) Department. Aggrieved by the same, the
present writ petition has been filed before this Court.
4. In the considered view of this Court, the claim made by
the Temple was already decided upto this Court and it was
rejected. Hence, if a counter claim has been made by the Temple,
the Tahsildar ought to have conducted an enquiry and should
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
have satisfied himself by the decree that has been passed by the
Civil Court. The Tahsildar cannot reject the application with an
one-line order stating that objections have been received from
the Temple. In fact, the Tahsildar ought to have strictly gone by
RSO 31(4) after putting the Temple/HR & CE Department on
notice.
6. In light of the above discussions, the impugned online
order dated 26.10.2024 is hereby quashed and the matter is
remitted back to the file of the respondent to deal with the
application submitted by the petitioner, as per the observations
made by this Court, after putting the Temple/HR & CE
Department on notice and a final order shall be passed within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. In the result, this writ petition is allowed with the above
directions. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently,
W.M.P.No.4401 of 2025 is closed.
10.02.2025
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order.
Internet : Yes/No.
Index: Yes/No.
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
drm
To
1. The Tahsildhar
Coimbatore (North), Coimbatore Taluk
Coimbatore District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
drm
10.02.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
