Madras High Court
AS/737/1986 of DURAISAMY Vs N ETHIRAJULU on 25 November 2002
BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT %DATED: 01.03.2019 *CORAM THE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Relief
?BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT%DATED: 01.03.2019*CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN+W.P.(MD)No.3020 of 2019#S.Muthusamy... Petitioner
Vs
$1.The District Revenue Officer,Collectorate Campus,Dindigul District, Dindigul.
2.The Tahsildar,Dindigul West Tauk,Dindigul District, Dindigul. ...Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India toissue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to consider andpass appropriate orders on the final representation of the petitioner dated17.09.2018 sent for the purpose of rectification of the mistakes committed inso far as to treat the Survey No.458/3 of Kamatchipuram Village, DindigulWest Taluk, Dindigul District from Odai to patta land and instead of to treatthe Survey No.458/1 of the said village as odai and issue patta for SurveyNo.458/3.!For Petitioner : Mr.A.Saravanan^For Respondents : Mr.M.KaruppasamyGovernment Advocate
:ORDER
Heard the learned counsel on either side.
2. The petitioner seeks issuance of patta in respect of the petitionmentioned lands.
3. The learned Government Advocate points out that the said lands havebeen classified as water body (Odai) in the revenue records and thattherefore, issuing a patta would be illegal.
4. Without going to the merits of the matter, this Court direct thesecond respondent to pass orders on the petitioner-s application on meritsand in accordance with law.
5. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.