M. Moorthy Vs. The District Collector, Dindigul District and Another

M. Moorthy vs The District Collector, Dindigul District and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Jul 01, 2016

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1190072

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1190072
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: M. Venugopal
Decided On: Jul 01, 2016
Case Number: W.P (MD) No. 11718 of 2016
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

M. Moorthy

Respondent

The District Collector, Dindigul District and Another

Excerpt

.....6.4.2016 to the second respondent/the tahsildar, kodaikanal taluk, dindigul district, praying for issuance of patta in respect of s.f.no.36/1 of kodaikanal village, measuring an extent of 0.76 cents. 5.it comes to be known that the petitioner, on numerous occasions, had submitted petitions praying for issuance of patta and it all proved futile. hence, he has filed the present writ petition. 6.considering the fact that the petitioner's representation, dated 6.4.2016 is pending before the second respondent/the tahsildar, kodaikanal taluk, dindigul district without any progress or disposal, this court, to secure the ends of justice, directs the second respondent/the tahsildar, kodaikanal taluk, dindigul district to look into the representation of the petitioner, dated 6.4.2016 and (earlier representations submitted by him, if any) within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. thereafter, the second respondent/the tahsildar, kodaikanal taluk, dindigul district is to pass a reasoned speaking order on merits( by affording necessary opportunity to the petitioner and others concerned, if any, in true letter and spirit) within a period of six weeks thereafter. in case, the second respondent requires any prescribed format/petition/application seeking issuance of patta from the petitioner, then it is open to him to obtain the same from the petitioner and thereafter to proceed further in the subject-matter in issue within the time determined by this court. the petitioner is directed to lend his assistance and co-operation to the second respondent in disposing of his representation, dated 6.4.2016(and the earlier representations, if any) within the time limit prescribed by this court. 7.with the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. no costs.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 6.4.2016 within the period stipulated by this Court.)

1. Heard both sides.

2.By consent of both sides, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

3.No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents.

4.The grievance of the Petitioner is that he had addressed a communication, dated 6.4.2016 to the Second Respondent/The Tahsildar, Kodaikanal Taluk, Dindigul District, praying for issuance of patta in respect of S.F.No.36/1 of Kodaikanal Village, measuring an extent of 0.76 cents.

5.It comes to be known that the Petitioner, on numerous occasions, had submitted Petitions praying for issuance of patta and it all proved futile. Hence, he has filed the present Writ Petition.

6.Considering the fact that the Petitioner's representation, dated 6.4.2016 is pending before the Second Respondent/The Tahsildar, Kodaikanal Taluk, Dindigul District without any progress or disposal, this Court, to secure the ends of justice, directs the Second Respondent/The Tahsildar, Kodaikanal Taluk, Dindigul District to look into the representation of the Petitioner, dated 6.4.2016 and (earlier representations submitted by him, if any) within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the Second Respondent/The Tahsildar, Kodaikanal Taluk, Dindigul District is to pass a reasoned speaking order on merits( by affording necessary opportunity to the Petitioner and others concerned, if any, in true letter and spirit) within a period of six weeks thereafter. In case, the Second Respondent requires any prescribed format/Petition/Application seeking issuance of patta from the Petitioner, then it is open to him to obtain the same from the Petitioner and thereafter to proceed further in the subject-matter in issue within the time determined by this Court. The Petitioner is directed to lend his assistance and co-operation to the Second Respondent in disposing of his representation, dated 6.4.2016(and the earlier representations, if any) within the time limit prescribed by this Court.

7.With the aforesaid observations and directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties M. Moorthy vs The District Collector, Dindigul District and A... Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge M. Venugopal