Madras High Court
WP(MD)/23113/2026 of Rajkumar R Vs The Tahsildar, Madurai North Taluk, on 17 August 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.08.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR Writ Petition(MD)No.23113 of 2026 R.Rajkumar ..Petitioner Vs 1. The Tahsildar, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District. 2. The Firka Surveyor, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District.
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 17.08.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR
Writ Petition(MD)No.23113 of 2026
R.Rajkumar
..Petitioner
Vs
1.The Tahsildar,
Madurai North Taluk,
Madurai District.
2.The Firka Surveyor,
Madurai North Taluk,
Madurai District.
..Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records relating to the impugned online refusal passed by the Respondent in Application No.2026/0123/24/003140 dated 15.04.2026 and quash the same and consequently directing the Respondent to conduct survey in respect of the land comprised in S.No. 28/2B2A2, Kulamangalam Bit II Village, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Premkumar
For Respondents : Mrs.K.Porkodi
Spl. Govt. Pleader
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.
ORDER
The writ petition is filed challenging the order passed by the first respondent rejecting the petitioner's online application seeking survey of the property.
2. According to the petitioner, he is the absolute owner of the property measuring 11.74 Ares, comprised in Survey No.28/2B2A2, situated at Kulamangalam Bit II Village, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District. In order to physically measure the property and fix the boundary stones, the petitioner submitted an online application to the second respondent on 15.04.2026. The petitioner also paid the requisite survey fees. Though initially a notice was issued for field inspection on 31.05.2026, without conducting any physical survey, the petitioner's application was rejected by the impugned communication, which was communicated to him through SMS. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has come before this Court.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order is a non-speaking order and, therefore, the same is liable to be set aside.
4. When the matter came up for hearing on 14.08.2026, this Court directed the learned Special Government Pleader, who had taken notice for the respondents, to obtain instructions as to whether any detailed and reasoned order had been passed.
5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that no separate order giving reasons for rejection of the application submitted by the petitioner has been passed. Further, the learned Special Government Pleader would submit that the petitioner's application was rejected on the ground that a suit is pending between the petitioner and the neighbouring landowner. However, the details of the litigation and its impact on the survey of the petitioner's property have not been mentioned.
6. This Court is unable to accept the submission made by the learned Special Government Pleader that the impugned order passed by the respondents rejecting the request of the petitioner is a reasoned order. Since no valid reasons have been assigned in the impugned communication for rejecting the petitioner's application, the same is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the file of the first respondent with a direction to consider the petitioner's application on its own merits and pass appropriate orders within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Needless to state, before passing any order, an opportunity of hearing shall be given to the petitioner, the neighbouring landowners and other interested parties.
7. With the above directions, this writ petition stands allowed. No costs. 17.08.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes skn To
1. The Tahsildar, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District.
2. The Firka Surveyor, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District.
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
skn
Writ Petition(MD)No.23113 of 2026
17.08.2026