- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 24 July 2026
- Bench
- Krishnan Ramasamy
- Case no.
- WP 35815/2025
Follow Madras High CourtFollow Krishnan Ramasamy
Judgment
ORDER The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 to maintain Survey No.259 as a cart-track by cancelling Pattas Nos.2322 and 956 issued in favour of respondents 5 and 6 in respect of Survey Nos.259/2 and 259/3, situated at Kattukudalur Village, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District, and consequently to forbear respondents 1 to 3 from issuing patta in respect of Survey No.259 in favour of respondents 7 and 8 or any other person.
¶2The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that patta has been wrongly issued in favour of respondents 5 and 6 in respect of the cart-track. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 30.06.2025 seeking cancellation of the said pattas. Since the said representation has not been considered, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition.
¶3The learned Government Counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3 submitted that a Peace Committee meeting has already been conducted and that no patta has been issued in respect of the cart-track. It was further submitted that the petitioner's representation dated 30.06.2025 would be considered by Page3 of 6 respondents 2 and 3 and appropriate action would be taken for restoring the cart-track in accordance with the revenue records.
¶4In view of the above submissions and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court directs respondents 2 and 3 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 30.06.2025, after issuing notice to all the necessary parties, and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, keeping in view the revenue records by restoring the cart tract, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim, and all issues are left open to be decided by the competent authority.
¶5With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 24-07-2026 Asi Page4 of 6 To
¶1The District Collector, Cuddalore
¶2The Revenue Divisional Officer Cuddalore.
¶3The Tahsildar, Panruti, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District.
¶4The Sub-Registrar Kadambpuliyur, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District. Page5 of 6 WPoNo.o35815oofo2025 KRISHNANoRAMASAMY,oJ. Asi WPoNo.o35815oofo2025 24-07-2026 Page6oofo6
Case details
Parties and counsel
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Priya W/o. G. Venkatesan, 382, Bharathi Street, Kattukudalur, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Collector Cuddalore 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Cuddalore. 3. The Tahsildar Panruti, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District 4. The Sub-Registrar Kadambpuliyur, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District. 5. Chitra W/o. Kolanji, Anna Salai, Kattugudalur, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District. 6. Saraswathi W/o. Manivannan, Anna Salai, Kattugudalur, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District. Page1 of 6 7. Raja S/o. Ramalingam, Anna Salai, Kattugudalur, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District. 8. Perumal S/o. Kolanji, Anna Salai, Kattugudalur, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 to maintain S.No.259/- Kattukudalur Village, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District as cart-track by cancelling the pattas Nos.2322,956 issued to respondents 5 and 6 in respect of S.Nos.259/2 and 259/3 in Kattukudalur Village, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District and consequently forbearing respondents 1 to 3 from issuing patta in respect of S.No.259/- Kattukudalur Village, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District to respondents 7 to 8 or any other person. For Petitioner(s): Ms.J.Pooja for Mr. D.Baskar For Respondent(s): Mr. C.Prabakaran Government Counsel for R1 to R3 Mr.M.Roshan Atiq Government Counsel for R4 Mr.P.Dinesh Kumar for R6 For R5, R7 & R8 – No appearance Page2 of 6
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.