Jayamani v. The District Revenue Officer

Order This writ petition has been filed, challenging the impugned order dated 10.12.2025 passed by the first respondent.

2.The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that she was not heard by the Revenue Divisional Officer and hence, the impugned order dated 10.12.2025 passed by the first respondent (The District Revenue officer) has got to be quashed.

3.However, as seen from the impugned order dated 10.12.2025 passed by the first respondent, the petitioner's interest has been adequately protected. The first respondent has directed the Tahsildar to conduct a fresh subdivision of the property, based on the supporting documents produced by the petitioner as well as the private respondents. The petitioner has also been afforded an opportunity to raise all objections before the Tahsildar for fresh subdivision.

4.This Court is not interfering with the impugned order.

5.Even though the Revenue Divisional Officer may not have afforded an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the District Revenue officer, in the Page3 of 6 impugned order dated 10.12.2025, has safeguarded the rights of the petitioner to raise all objections before the Tahsildar by producing all the relevant documents. In such circumstances, the question of quashing the impugned order dated 10.12.2025 passed by the first respondent does not arise.

6.To protect the interest of the petitioner, the only limited relief that can be granted by this Court in this writ petition is to direct the Tahsildar concerned to issue notice to the petitioner before making the subdivision of the property, morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition and only after hearing the objections of the petitioner through her supporting documents, the Tahsildar concerned shall complete the subdivision of the property. The Tahsildar shall also hear the objections of the rival parties, who are the private respondents in this writ petition.

7.For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the Tahsildar, Nambiyur Taluk to issue notice to the petitioner prior to the subdivision of the property, morefully described in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition and after hearing the objections of the petitioner and the private respondents, the Tahsildar, Nambiyur Taluk shall complete the subdivision of the property by adhering to the principles of natural justice. Page4 of 6

8.The Tahsildar, Nambiyur Taluk shall give due consideration to the objections raised by the petitioner as well as the private respondents and the supporting documents produced by them and only thereafter, shall complete the subdivision of the property.

9.Since the Tahsildar, Nambiyur Taluk is not a party respondent in this writ petition, this Court, by exercising its suo motu powers, impleads the Tahsildar, Nambiyur Taluk as the party sixth respondent in this writ petition. The Registry is directed to carry out the necessary amendment.

10.Mr.D.Ravichander, learned Special Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the first respondent and the newly impleaded sixth respondent as well. Since no adverse order is being passed against respondents 2 to 5, notice to respondents 2 to 5 is dispensed with by this Court.

11.The newly impleaded sixth respondent shall complete the aforesaid exercise of subdivision of the property, by adhering to the directions issued by this Court, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected WMP is closed. No costs. 12-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VGA Page5 of 6 To

¶1The District Revenue officer Erode District

¶2The Tahsildar, Nambiyur Taluk WPoNo.o8954oofo2026 ABDULoQUDDHOSEoJ. VGA WPoNo.o8954oofo2026 AND WMPoNO.o9654oOFo2026 12-03-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE AND WMP NO. 9654 OF 2026 Jayamani ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The District Revenue officer Erode District 2. A.Subramaniam 3. C.Ponnappa Gounder 4. R.Chinnammal 5. R.Rajamani 6.The Tahsildar, Nambiyur Taluk (6th respondent suo motu impleaded by this Court vide order dated 12.03.2026 by AQJ) ..Respondent(s) calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent dated 10.12.2025 having reference Pa.Mu.6977/2025/U2 and to quash the same. For Petitioner(s): Mr.T.Perinbanathan For Respondent(s): Mr.D.Ravichander,SGP For R1 & R6 ND/W - R2 to R5 -Pvt Page2 of 6