Madras High Court
WP(MD)/20282/2017 of ESTHER RANI Vs THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR on 14 October 2026
WP(MD) No. 20282 of 2017
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 14-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU
WP(MD) No. 20282 of 2017
CNR:{HCMD011227202017}
and
WMP(MD) Nos.16528 and 16529 of 2017
Esther Rani
W/o.Gunasekaran Ponmani
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The District Collector,
Tirunelveli District,
Tirunelveli.
2. The Sub Collector,
Cheranmahadevi,
Tirunelveli District,
Tirunelveli.
3. The Tahsildar,
Radhapuram Taluk,
Radhapuram,
Tirunelveli District.
4. Shanmuganathan (died)
5. R.Kaviya,
W/o.Ramu
6. S.Balamurugan,
S/o.Late Shanmuganathan
7. M.Eswari Priyanka,
W/o.Muthushiva
(R6 and R7 are impleaded vide court order dated 06.03.2026 in WMP(MD)No.3334 of 2026 in WP(MD)No.20282 of 2017)
__________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 12:44:41 pm )
WP(MD) No. 20282 of 2017
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order made by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.A3/21327/2016 dated 07.08.2017 and set aside the same and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to pass an order on merit after making fresh enquiry.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.S.R. Anbarasu
For Respondent(s):
Mr.I.Pinaygash
Special Government Pleader
for RR1 to 3
Mr.B.N.Raja Mohammed
for RR5 to 7
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
Seeking to quash the dated 07.08.2017 passed by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.A3/21327/2016, the petitioner is before this Court.
2. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and carefully perused the material placed on record.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission for filing an appeal as against the order passed by the third respondent. __________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 12:44:41 pm )
WP(MD) No. 20282 of 2017
4. However, considering the provisions of Rule 4(4) of the Tamil Nadu Patta Passbook Rules, 1987, it is imperative that when a dispute of title had been raised before the revenue authorities, they are bound to direct the parties to resolve the dispute before a civil Court and in that regard, the liberty as such sought for by the petitioner could not be looked into. However, the petitioner would be entitled to approach the competent civil Court to establish her title.
5. For the aforesaid reason, this Writ Petition stands closed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent civil Court to establish her title. It is made clear that if any civil suit is presented by the petitioner, the period of pendency of this writ petition shall be excluded for counting the period of limitation for presenting the said suit. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 14-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No ABR __________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 12:44:41 pm )
WP(MD) No. 20282 of 2017 To
1. The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.
2. The Sub Collector, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.
3. The Tahsildar, Radhapuram Taluk, Radhapuram, Tirunelveli District. __________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 12:44:41 pm )
WP(MD) No. 20282 of 2017 K.KUMARESH BABU, J. ABR WP(MD) No. 20282 of 2017 14-10-2026 __________
( Uploaded on: 29/10/2026 12:44:41 pm )