Madras High Court Directs Tahsildar to Consider Representation for Survey and Demarcation of Property — Petitioner's Application for Boundary Demarcation Pending Since December 2024. The court issued a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to pass orders on the petitioner's representation within six weeks, as the respondent agreed to consider it.

High Court: Madras High Court
  • 23
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Nagaraj, filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the Tahsildar, Sivagiri, Tenkasi District, to survey and demarcate the boundaries of his property comprised in S.No.875/2, measuring 19 ½ cents, situated at Thirumalapuram Village, Ramanathapuram Post, Sivagiri Taluk, Tenkasi District. The petitioner claimed ownership based on a Release deed from his grandfather Ponthaiya for 8.60 cents and a sale deed from his brother for 3 ¼ cents, and had constructed a house and been in possession for 15 years. Due to attempted encroachment by adjacent landowners, the petitioner applied on 12.09.2024 to the first respondent for survey and demarcation, paying a fee of Rs.800/- via e-challan. No action was taken, leading to a representation on 10.12.2024, which also remained unaddressed. The learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner had not produced supporting documents, but assured that the representation would be considered on merits. The court, in light of this submission, directed the first respondent to consider the representation dated 10.12.2024 and pass orders within six weeks from receipt of the order copy. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Direction to Consider Representation - Petitioner sought survey and demarcation of his property based on a representation dated 10.12.2024 - The court, noting the respondent's submission that the representation would be considered, directed the first respondent to pass orders within six weeks - Held that a writ of mandamus is maintainable to compel consideration of a pending representation (Paras 1-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Tahsildar should be directed to consider the petitioner's representation for survey and demarcation of his property.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court directed the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.12.2024 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition was disposed of.

Law Points

  • Writ of Mandamus
  • Article 226
  • Survey and Demarcation
  • Representation
  • Time-bound Disposal
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 527

W.P(MD)NO.696 OF 2025

2025-01-09

N.MALA

2025:MHC:136

Mr.C.Suresh Kannan (for petitioner), Mr.A.Kannan, Addl.Govt.Pleader (for respondents)

1.The Tahsildar, Sivagiri, Tenkasi District. 2.The Surveyor, Sivagiri, Tenkasi District.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ Petition under Article 226 seeking a Writ of Mandamus for survey and demarcation of property.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner seeks direction to the first respondent to survey and demarcate the boundaries of his property and consider his representation dated 10.12.2024.

Filing Reason

The petitioner's application for survey and demarcation dated 12.09.2024 and subsequent representation dated 10.12.2024 were not acted upon by the respondents.

Issues

Whether the respondents are obligated to consider the petitioner's representation for survey and demarcation.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner submitted that he made an application on 12.09.2024 with necessary fee and a representation on 10.12.2024, but no action was taken. Respondent's counsel submitted that the petitioner had not produced supporting documents, but the representation would be considered on merits.

Ratio Decidendi

A writ of mandamus can be issued to direct a public authority to consider a pending representation in accordance with law, especially when the authority agrees to do so.

Judgment Excerpts

In the light of the above submission made by the learned Additional Government Pleader, a direction is issued to the first respondent to consider the representation of the Petitioner, dated 10.12.2024 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition on 09.01.2025. The court, with consent of both parties, took up the petition for final disposal at the admission stage and disposed it on the same day.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Directs Tahsildar to Consider Representation for Survey and Demarcation of Property — Petitioner's Application for Boundary Demarcation Pending Since December 2024. The court issued a writ of mandamus directing the first responden...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Life Sentence for Father Who Murdered His 1.5-Year-Old Son by Drowning in Well — Circumstantial Evidence Sufficient to Prove Guilt Under Section 302 IPC. The appellant's motive, last seen with the deceased, and failure to ...