- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 8 July 2026
- Bench
- Krishnan Ramasamy
- Case no.
- WP 26028/2026
Judgment
ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 & 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.09.2025.
¶2Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has made a representation dated 10.09.2025 before the respondents 1 & 2 to cancel the sub division patta pertaining to S.No.179/4, Pillali Village, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore, measuring an extent of 550 sq.ft and to take appropriate legal action on erring officials, who have subdivided the property from the survey No.179/3, Pillali Village, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore district and granted patta in favour of the sixth respondent and consequentially forbear the respondents 5 Page3 of 5 and 6 from putting up any construction or alienating or encumbering and disturbing the peaceful possession in any manner and in any capacity bearing in the D.No.70 comprised in S.No.179/3, Pillali Village, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore District measuring to an extent of 2152 Sq.ft. However, the said representation was not considered, as on date. Hence, this writ petition.
¶3Mr.B.Pachaiyappan, learned Government's Counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 and submitted that the petitioner's representation dated 10.09.2025 will be considered within a period of eight weeks.
¶4Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
¶5Considering the limited relief sought by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, directs the second respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated
10.09.2025, after issuing due notice to the petitioner as well as respondents 5 & 6 and other aggrieved persons, if any, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Page4 of 5
¶6With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. 08-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VM To:
¶1The District collector, o/o.District Collector, Cuddalore District.
¶2The Reveneu Divisional officer, o/o.Revenue Divisional office, Cuddalore.
¶3The Tahsildar, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore District.
¶4The Inspector of police, Nellikuppam Police Station, Cuddalore District. WPoNo.o26028oofo2026 KRISHNANoRAMASAMY,oJ. VM WPoNo.o26028oofo2026 08-07-2026 Page5oofo5
Case details
Parties and counsel
Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY K.Girija ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The District collector, o/o.District Collector, Cuddalore District. 2. The Reveneu Divisional officer, o/o.Revenue Divisional office, Cuddalore. 3. The Tahsildar, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore District. 4. The Inspector of police, Nellikuppam Police Station, Cuddalore District. 5. Govindammal 6. Gomathi ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st and 2nd respondent to cancel the sub division patta pertaining in S.No.179/4, Pillali Village, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore measuring to an extent of 550 sq.ft based on the representation dated 10.09.2025 and to take appropriate legal action on erring Page2 of 5 officials who have subdivided the property from the survey No.179/3, Pillali Village, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore district and granted patta in favour of the 6th respondent and consequentially order forbearing the respondents 5 and 6 from putting up any construction or alienating or encumbering and disturbing the peaceful possession in any manner and in any capacity bearing in the D.No.70 comprised in S.No.179/3, Pillali Village, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore District measuring to an extent of 2152 Sq.ft. For Petitioner(s): Mr.P.Ananda Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr.B.Pachaiyappan, Government's Counsel for R1 to 3 Mr.Durai Gunasekaran, Government Advocate (Crl.side) for R4
Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.