Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, R.Essakimuthu, D.Vanaraja, and D.Bharathiraja, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the rejection orders dated 7.5.2024 passed by the third respondent, the Tahsildar, Tiruchendur Taluk, Thoothukudi District, and to direct the Tahsildar to issue patta in their favour for the property situated in Resurvey No.238/19D1, Paramankurichi Village, Tiruchendur Taluk, Thoothukudi District. The first petitioner purchased the property measuring 4.50 cents from one Durairaj Nadar under a registered sale deed dated 15.09.1992. Subsequently, a rectification deed was executed on 15.4.2024 to correct mistakes in the boundaries. On the same day, Durairaj Nadar executed two settlement deeds in favour of the second and third petitioners. The petitioners applied for patta, but the Tahsildar rejected their applications without affording them an opportunity of hearing. The court heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.M.Mithun, and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents, Mr.A.Kannan. The court observed that the impugned orders were passed in violation of principles of natural justice as no notice or hearing was given to the petitioners before rejection. The court set aside the impugned orders and remitted the matter back to the Tahsildar for fresh consideration, directing that the petitioners be given an opportunity of hearing within a period of eight weeks. The writ petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Right to be Heard - Patta Rejection - The Tahsildar rejected the petitioners' application for patta without giving them an opportunity of hearing, which is a violation of principles of natural justice - Held that the impugned orders are liable to be set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the petitioners (Paras 4-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the rejection of the petitioners' application for patta by the Tahsildar without affording an opportunity of hearing is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 7.5.2024 are set aside. The matter is remitted back to the third respondent for fresh consideration, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- right to be heard
- patta issuance
- rectification deed
- settlement deed
- writ of certiorarified mandamus
