Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Annaiyappa vs The District Revenue Officer on 22 June, 2017

Author: M.Duraiswamy

Bench: M.Duraiswamy

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.06.2017

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE  M.DURAISWAMY

 W.P.No.15757 of 2017

Annaiyappa							... Petitioner 

Vs.

1. The District Revenue Officer,
    Krishnagiri.

2. The Sub-Collector,
    Hosur.

3. The Tahsildar,
    Shoolagiri Taluk Office,  
    Shoolagiri, Krishnagiri District.

4. Ramakrishnappa						... Respondents

	Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 17.01.2017 for rectifying the errors crept in the revenue records in respect of lands to an extent of 0.05.5 Hectare comprised in Survey No.113/4, 0.57.0 Hectare comprised in Survey No.114/3, 1.21.5 Hectare in Survey No.504 and 0.82.5 Hectare in Survey No.505 situate at Sanamavoo Village, Shoolagiri Taluk, Krishnagiri District and issue patta to the petitioner within the time to be stipulated by this court.


	For Petitioner 	: Mr.R. Bharathkumar
	For Respondents	: Mr.R.S.Selvam,								  	 Government Advocate (R1 to 3)
 O R D E R

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 17.01.2017 for rectifying the errors crept in, in the revenue records in respect of lands measuring to an extent of 0.05.5 Hectare comprised in Survey No.113/4, 0.57.0 Hectare comprised in Survey No.114/3, 1.21.5 Hectare in Survey No.504 and 0.82.5 Hectare in Survey No.505 situated at Sanamavoo Village, Shoolagiri Taluk, Krishnagiri District and issue patta to the petitioner within a time frame.

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that inspite of the petitioner's representation dated 17.01.2017, the 1st respondent has not passed any order so far.

3.Mr.R.S. Selvam, learned Government Advocate taking notice for the respondents 1 to 3 submitted that the 1st respondent may be directed to consider the petitioner's representation in accordance with law, after giving notice to the 4th respondent.

4.In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, taking into consideration the limited prayer sought for in the Writ Petition, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, I direct the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 17.01.2017 and pass orders, after giving notice to the 4th respondent, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5.With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Index     : No							 22.06.2017
Internet : Yes
va/nl


To

1. The District Revenue Officer,
    Krishnagiri.

2. The Sub-Collector,
    Hosur.

3. The Tahsildar,
    Shoolagiri Taluk Office,  
    Shoolagiri,
    Krishnagiri District.

M.DURAISWAMY, J.
									va/nl















W.P.No.15757 of 2017


















22.06.2017

http://www.judis.nic.in