Madras High Court
Appadurai.M vs The District Adi-Dravidar Welfare ... on 21 November, 2025
Author: C.V.Karthikeyan
Bench: C.V. Karthikeyan
WMP(MD) NO. 23747 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 21-11-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN
WMP(MD) NO. 23747 of 2023
AND
REV.APLW(MD) SR NO. 79773 OF 2023
1. Appadurai.M Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The District Adi-Dravidar Welfare Officer
Ramanathapuram
Ramanathapuram District.
2. The Speical Tahsildar (Adi Dravidar Welfare)
Muthukulathur
Ramanathapuram District.
3. The Tahsildar
Kadaladi Taluk
Ramanathapuram.
Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. Bharathi Kannan.S
For Respondent(s): Mr.P.T.Thiraviam
Government Advocate
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 06:45:19 pm )
Prayer in WMP(MD)No.23747 of 2023: This petition is filed under Section 5 of
Limitation Act to Condone the Delay of 105 Days in fling the Review Application
as against the order passed in W.P.(MD).No. 9318 of 2023 dated 06.06.2023 on
the file of this Honble Court and pass such further or other orders as this Honble
Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render
justice.
Prayer in Review Application SR.No.79773 of 2023: This petition is filed
under Order 47 r/w Rule 1 and Section 114 of CPC against the order passed in
WP(MD)No.9318 of 2023 dated 06.06.2023.
ORDER
Review APLC(MD)SR.No.79773 of 2023 has been filed seeking re-visitation of the order dated 06.06.2023 in the writ petition which has been filed in the nature of certiorari seeking records impugned assigned patta cancellation order dated 23.05.2018.
2. While examining the arguments advanced, this Court had noted that notice had been directed to the writ petitioner and he had refused to receive the same and therefore, a copy of notice was affixed in the e-sewa centre in the village. Holding that the petitioner had to suffer from laches for not receiving notice, the writ petition was dismissed.
2/5https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 06:45:19 pm )
3. Now, the learned counsel claims that notice has not been properly served and as a matter of fact, it is contended that at various stages there was violation of procedure as stipulated by law.
4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 brought to the notice of this Court that after taking steps not only this writ petitioner, but nearly about 55 persons, have been vacated and their lands have been resumed by the Government for re-allocation and re-assignment.
5. In view of that particular fact and the grounds raised for the review application are not sustainable, this Court is not inclined to condone the delay in filing the review application. WMP(MD)No.23747 of 2023 is dismissed.
Consequent thereof, Review APLC(MD)SR.No.79773 of 2023 is rejected at the SR stage itself.
21-11-2025 CM 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 06:45:19 pm ) To
1. The District Adi-Dravidar Welfare Officer Ramanathapuram Ramanathapuram District.
2. The Speical Tahsildar (Adi Dravidar Welfare) Muthukulathur Ramanathapuram District.
3. The Tahsildar Kadaladi Taluk Ramanathapuram.
4/5https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 06:45:19 pm ) C.V.KARTHIKEYAN., J.
CM WMP(MD) NO. 23747 of 2023 AND REV.APLW(MD) SR NO. 79773 OF 2023 21.11.2025 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/11/2025 06:45:19 pm )