Vairavel v. The District Collector

ORDER Heard both sides.

¶2I am not inclined to issue mandamus as sought for. This is because the impugned memorandum dated 19.09.2023 issued by the Tahsildar, Kariyapatti is not only in favour of the petitioner but to the prejudice of one Selvarathinam. Such an order could not have been passed behind the back of Selvarathinam. Therefore, I direct the second respondent to revisit the issue. The petitioner has already given a representation dated 23.05.2023.

¶3The second respondent shall issue notice to Selvarathinam and hold enquiry and thereafter, pass final order on the petitioner's representation dated

23.05.2023. After such an order is passed, it shall be implemented in the manner known to law. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶4The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

08.12.2023 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No rmi To

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

2.The Tahsildar, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

3.The Revenue Inspector, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

4.The Firka Surveyor, Kalkurichi Firka, Virudhunagar District.

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. rmi

08.12.2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.12.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Vairavel ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar. 2.The Tahsildar, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District. 3.The Revenue Inspector, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District. 4.The Firka Surveyor, Kalkurichi Firka, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 4th respondent to implement the order passed by the 2nd respondent vide his proceedings in Na.Ka.A8/3524/202 dated 19.09.2023. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Ananda Kumar For Respondents : Mr.M.Prakash Additional Government Pleader