Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, S. James, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, seeking a Writ of Mandamus. The petition prayed for a direction to the first to fourth respondents (the District Collector, Dindigul; the District Revenue Officer, Dindigul; the Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul; and the Tahsildar, Dindigul East) to consider and pass orders on her representation dated 26.12.2024. The representation requested cancellation of pattas (Patta Nos. 7770, 7771, 7772, and 7773) in respect of survey numbers 150/1A1, 150/1A2, 150/1A3, and 150/1A4, which stood in the names of the husband of the fifth respondent and respondents 6 to 8. The petitioner claimed to be the absolute owner of the subject property and alleged that upon discovering the wrongful inclusion of the private respondents' names in the patta, she submitted an application for cancellation. The matter came up for hearing before Justice P.B. Balaji. The provided judgment excerpt is incomplete, ending abruptly before the court's reasoning or final order. Consequently, the full decision and legal analysis are not available.
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing the revenue authorities to consider the petitioner's representation for cancellation of patta.
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (03) 279
Mr. M.C. Maninder Nath for petitioner; Mr. B. Saravanan, Additional Government Pleader for respondents 1-4
1.The District Collector, Dindigul; 2.The District Revenue Officer, Dindigul; 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul; 4.The Tahsildar, Dindigul East; 5.Silambuselvi; 6.M.Rajamani; 7.Dhanalakshmi; 8.M.Ramesh
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus to direct revenue authorities to consider a representation for cancellation of patta.
Remedy Sought
Direction to the first to fourth respondents to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 26.12.2024 for cancellation of pattas Patta Nos. 7770, 7771, 7772, and 7773 in Survey Nos. 150/1A1, 150/1A2, 150/1A3, and 150/1A4.
Filing Reason
The petitioner claimed to be the absolute owner of the property and alleged that the names of the private respondents (husband of the fifth respondent and respondents 6 to 8) were wrongly included in the patta.
Issues
Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing the revenue authorities to consider the petitioner's representation for cancellation of patta.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner submitted that she is the absolute owner of the subject property and that the names of the private respondents were wrongly included in the patta, and therefore sought a direction to the revenue authorities to consider her representation for cancellation.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct the third respondent to pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 26.12.2024, seeking cancellation of patta issued to the private respondents namely husband of the fifth respondent and father of the respondents 6 to 8.
The petitioner claiming to be the absolute owner of the subject property on coming to know that the names of the fifth to eighth respondents have wrongly been included in the patta of her property, gave an application for cancellation of the patta Nos.7770, 7771, 7772 and 7773, in respect of Survey Nos.150/1A1, 150/1A2, 150/1A3 and 150/1A4.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India, 1950: Article 226
