W.P(MD)No. 14241 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :14.11.2025 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY W.P(MD)No. 14241 of 2022 and W.M.P. (MD) Nos.10174 & 10177 of 2022 Maheshraj ... Petitioner Vs 1. The District Revenue Officer, District Collectorate Campus, Thiruchirappalli District. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srirangam Division, Thiruchirappalli District. 3. The Tahsildar, Marungapuri Taluk, Thiruchirappalli District. 4. The Village Administrative Officer, Thivarankurichi Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Thiruchirappalli District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire records relating to the Impugned proceeding issued by the first respondent in Na.Ka.A2/7139/2022 dated 05.05.2022 and the Impugned proceeding issued by the second respondent in Mu.Mu. 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No. 14241 of 2022 A5/2262/2020 dated NIL.10.2021 and the signed the same 02.02.2022 and to quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents herein to issue patta to the petitioner for the land to an extent of 650 square feet in old Survey No.309/1, New Survey No.258, subdivided Survey No.640/2 of Thuvarankurichi Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Thiruchirappali District based on the Petitioner's registered Will dated 27.06.1988 under Doc. No. 9/1988 and petitioner's father title deed dated 18.06.1966 under Doc.No. 3360/1966 and as well as the petitioner's father's vendor's title deed dated 16.02.1951 under Doc. No.677/1951 and to pass such orders. For Petitioner : Mr. A.Saravanan. For Respondents : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam Government Advocate O R D E R An order dated 02.02.2022 of the Revenue Divisional Officer and the subsequent order dated 05.05.2022 of the District Revenue Officer confirming the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer are challenged in this Writ Petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner's father purchased two items of property bearing old survey No.309/1, New Survey No.258 and now bearing survey No.640/1 and 640/2 under a registered sale deed dated 18.06.1966 from one Ramanujam Naidu. 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No. 14241 of 2022 Thereafter, he states that the petitioner's father, Ganapathi, executed a registered Will dated 27.06.1988 under Doc.No.9 of 1998 bequeathing the above mentioned properties along with other properties in the petitioner's favour. He also states that the Will came into effect upon his father's death on 17.07.1997. 3. In spite of noticing the basis of the petitioner's claim for patta in respect of survey No.640/2, learned counsel submits that the said request was rejected both by the Revenue Divisional Officer and the District Revenue Officer on the erroneous basis that the petitioner is requesting for a free house site patta. He submits that both the orders referred to the grant of patta to the petitioner in respect of the survey No.640/1 and that the patta is being refused in respect of survey No.640/2 for that reason. 4. Learned Government Advocate appears on behalf of all the respondents. He submits that survey No.640/2 is recorded as 'Sarkar Poramboke', 'Kali Natham'. He also submits that the orders of the Revenue Divisional Officer and the District Revenue Officer are concurrent orders and that no interference is warranted. 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No. 14241 of 2022 5. On perusal of the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, it is noticeable that the sale deeds pertaining to the property have been referred to in a table at Page No.2 of the said order. The said table makes reference to Doc. No.3360 of 1966, under which Ramanujam Naidu conveyed the property to Ganapathy Chettiar. It also draws reference to Will bearing Doc.No.9 of 1988, under which Ganapathi Chettiar bequeaths the property to Mahesh (Minor), represented by Neelavathiammal (Guardian). The said Mahesh is the petitioner herein. Upon examining the encumbrance certificate for the period 1975 to 2020, it records that there are no encumbrances relating to the property. Thereafter, the revenue records have been examined and it has been noticed that the property is registered as 'Sarkar poramboke' with the remark 'Kali Manai”. The rejection orders proceeded on this basis. 6. Significantly, it is recorded in the order as under: “,jpy; kDjhuu; gl;lh toq;f NfhUk; Gy vz;: 640/2 tp];jPuzk; 0.0075 r.kP fhype;j;jk; vd fpuhk ej;jk; mlq;fypy; cs;sJ. ,e;jpyj;jpy; kDjhuu; Ntyp Nghl;L Fbir mikj;J gad;gLj;jp tUfpwhu;. ,e;epyk; 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No. 14241 of 2022 kDjhuupd; je;ij jpU fzgjp j.ng.Kj;Jf; fUg;gd; nrl;bahu; vd;gtu; fle;j 01.06.1966y; fpiua Mtz vz;: 258-I fpiuak; ngw;Ws;shu;. Nkw;gb Gy vz;: 640/2 ,lj;jpd; ehd;F vy;iyAk; gj;jpuj;jpy; cs;s ehd;F vy;iyAk; xj;J NghfpwJ. NkYk; Nkw;gb ej;jk; kidf;F Mtzk; kw;Wk; mDgtj;jpd; mbg;gilapy; gl;lh toq;f VJthf Gy vz; 640/2-f;F jPu;it tpjpf;f kUq;fhGup tl;lhl;rpau; mwpf;if rku;gpj;Js;shu;.” 7. It appears that the Revenue Divisional Officer noticed the fact that the property was purchased by the petitioner's father under sale deed dated 01.06.1966 (18.06.1966) and that the boundaries match those of survey No.640/2. The Revenue Divisional Officer also took note of the report of the Tahsildar to that effect. Thereafter, by drawing reference to Revenue Standing Order 21, it appears that the petitioner's request was rejected on the ground that the family income should not be in excess of ?12,000/. Thus, the impugned order of the Revenue Divisional Officer suffers from non-application of mind. The subsequent order of the District Revenue Officer substantially reproduces the facts set out in the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer and thereafter confirms such order. 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No. 14241 of 2022 8. Because these orders suffer from non-application of mind with regard to the basis of the petitioner's claim, these orders are set aside and the matter is remanded to the Revenue Divisional Officer for fresh consideration. After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner a fresh speaking order shall be issued within three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9. This Writ Petition is disposed of on these terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. NCS : Yes/No 14.11.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd To 1. The District Revenue Officer, District Collectorate Campus, Thiruchirappalli District. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srirangam Division, Thiruchirappalli District. 3. The Tahsildar, Marungapuri Taluk, Thiruchirappalli District. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No. 14241 of 2022 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY.,J. apd 4. The Village Administrative Officer, Thivarankurichi Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Thiruchirappalli District. ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No. 14241 of 2022 14.11.2025 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis