Ajmal Khan v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

ORDER Heard both sides.

¶2The petitioner claims right over Survey Nos.70/1A and 70/3a. It is now in the name of Thangaraj. The petitioner states that this mistake had happened on account of error that crept in during UDR. If that be so, the petitioner has to move the District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram. As and when such a petition is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be entertained without reference to limitation and disposed of on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks thereafter. I make it clear that I have not gone into the merits of the matter. It is for the third respondent to pass order one way or the other.

¶3This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.

08.11.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No MGA To

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

2.The Special Tahsildar, O/o Ramanathapuram Municipality, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram.

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. MGA

08.11.2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.11.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Ajmal Khan ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District. 2.The Special Tahsildar, O/o Ramanathapuram Municipality, Ramanathapuram District. 3.The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram. (R.3 is suo motu impleaded vide order of this Court dated 08.11.2023) ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 23.06.2023 within the time frame to be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Ms.Sudarkodinatchiyaar For Respondents : Mr.V.Nirmal Kumar Government Advocate for R.1 & R.2 Mr.M.Siddharthan Additional Government Pleader for R.3