Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. Considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 3, this Court directs the third respondent to conduct an enquiry, after giving due notice and opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner as well as fifth respondent and…
Judgment
W.P.No.36386 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDated : 25.09.2025CORAMTHE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMYW.P.No.36386 of 2025S.Shanmugam... Petitioner Vs.
The District Collector, Collectorate, Namakkal District, Namakkal.
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Namakkal.
The Tahsildar, Rasipuram Taluk Office, Rasipuram, Namakkal District.
The Sub Registrar, Rasipuram Sub Registrar Office, Rasipuram.
S.Manimegalai... RespondentsPrayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent not to transfer or modify the patta No.41 in S.No.174/4 extent of 0.86.0 hectare 1/6https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.36386 of 2025situated at Pattanam Revenue Village, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District to the fifth respondent without due process of law. For Petitioner : Mr.C.MariappanFor Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.C.Jayaprakash, Government AdvocateFor Respondent 4 : Mr.U.Baranidharan, Special Government PleaderORDERThe relief sought for in this writ petition is to direct the third respondent not to transfer or modify the patta No.41 in S.No.174/4 extent of 0.86.0 hectare situated at Pattanam Revenue Village, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District to the fifth respondent without due process of law.2.
Mr.C.Jayaprakash, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of fourth respondent. By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner 2/6https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.36386 of 2025has purchased a agricultural land to an extent of 0.86.0 hectare in S.No.174/4 situated at Pattanam Village from one Athanyammal and her legal heirs. The revenue authorities also issued a patta bearing patta No.41 in favour of the petitioner. This being so, the fifth respondent attempting to trasfer the aforesaid patta in her favour by producing forged documents. In this regard, the petitioner has sent a representation dated 28.11.2024 to the third respondent, requesting not to transfer Patta No.41 and not to sub divide patta apart from making correction under UDR. However, no reply was given.
The petitioner has also sent representation dated 23.05.2025 to the respondents 1 & 2. However, no action has been taken. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.4. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the respondents have initiated the process to conduct an enquiry. Therefore, he seeks four weeks time to complete the entire exercise5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the 3/6https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.36386 of 2025materials available on record.
Operative part
Considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 3, this Court directs the third respondent to conduct an enquiry, after giving due notice and opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner as well as fifth respondent and aggrieved persons, if any and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.25.09.2025Speaking/Non-speaking orderIndex : Yes / NoNeutral Citation : Yes / NovmTo1.The District Collector,4/6https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.36386 of 2025 Collectorate, Namakkal District, Namakkal. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Namakkal. 3. The Tahsildar, Rasipuram Taluk Office, Rasipuram, Namakkal District. 4. The Sub Registrar, Rasipuram Sub Registrar Office, Rasipuram.KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J.,vm5/6https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.36386 of 2025W.P.No.36386 of 202525.09.20256/6https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.