Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

S. Senthilkumar Vs. The District Collector, Namakkal District and Others

S. Senthilkumar vs The District Collector, Namakkal District and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Oct 27, 2015
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1179363

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Writ Petition No. 28771 of 2012
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

S. Senthilkumar

Respondent

The District Collector, Namakkal District and Others

Excerpt

(prayer: this writ petition is filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the second respondent in na.ka.no.4600/11/a6 dated 17.4.2012 and quash the same.) 1. heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned. 2. the main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the second respondent had passed the impugned order, dated 17.4.2012, by which a sub division had been made, with regard to the lands in question and the patta, which had been issued in the name of the petitioner, had also been cancelled, without issuing a notice to the petitioner. in such circumstances, this court may be pleased to set aside the impugned order of the second respondent, dated 17.4.2012, and remit the matter back to the second respondent to pass appropriate orders, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the third respondent and the other persons concerned, if any, within a time frame specified by this court. the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents have no objection for this court passing such an order. 3. in such circumstances, the impugned order of the second respondent, dated 17.4.2012, is set aside and the second respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders, with regard to the effecting of the sub division and with regard to the issuance of patta, in respect of the lands in question, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the third respondent and other persons concerned, if any, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. the writ petition is ordered accordingly. no costs.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.4600/11/A6 dated 17.4.2012 and quash the same.)

1. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned.

2. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the second respondent had passed the impugned order, dated 17.4.2012, by which a sub division had been made, with regard to the lands in question and the patta, which had been issued in the name of the petitioner, had also been cancelled, without issuing a notice to the petitioner. In such circumstances, this Court may be pleased to set aside the impugned order of the second respondent, dated 17.4.2012, and remit the matter back to the second respondent to pass appropriate orders, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the third respondent and the other persons concerned, if any, within a time frame specified by this Court. The learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents have no objection for this court passing such an order.

3. In such circumstances, the impugned order of the second respondent, dated 17.4.2012, is set aside and the second respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders, with regard to the effecting of the sub division and with regard to the issuance of patta, in respect of the lands in question, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the third respondent and other persons concerned, if any, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial