Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 193339 (MAD)

M.RANI v. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

WP/39322/2025 · 2025-10-17

G K Ilanthiraiyan

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP.No.39322 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 17.10.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN WP.No.39322 of 2025 1.M.Rani 2.Kowsalya 3.S.Vijayakumar 4.Sangeetha Saravanan .... Petitioners Vs 1. The District Collector, Vellore District, AH-45, Vellore District Collector Office, Vellore – 632 009 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudiyattam, Near RTO Office, Gandhi Nagar, Gudiyattam – 632 602 3.The Tahsildar, Pernambut Taluk, Vellore District 635 810 .... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent herein to consider and dispose of the petitioners' representation dated 27.03.2023 within a time frame to be fixed by this Court by passing appropriate orders 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.39322 of 2025 in accordance with law. For Petitioners : Mr.A.K.Raghavlu For Respondents : Mr.N.Naveen Kumar, Government Advocate ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent to consider the representation submitted by the petitioners dated 27.03.2023. 2. On perusal of the representation submitted by the petitioners, it is revealed that originally the subject property comprised in old survey no.106/1, new survey No.106/90 to an extent of 1824 sq.ft. situated at Erukkambattu Village, Vellore District was owned by the petitioner's father and the same was permitted to be enjoyed by the petitioner's paternal uncle. After demise of the petitioner's father, the petitioner's paternal uncle enjoyed the property and obtained patta in his name. Subsequently, it was settled in favour of his wife by registered settlement deed. Therefore, the petitioner sought to resume the land in his father. However, the petitioner ought to have approached civil court for appropriate relief by challenging the 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.39322 of 2025 settlement deed executed by his paternal uncle in the manner known to law. Therefore, the representation submitted by the petitioners cannot be considered by the respondents. 3. In view of the above discussion, this writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 17.10.2025 (2/2) Neutral citation :Yes/No Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking lok G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.39322 of 2025 lok To 1. The District Collector, Vellore District, AH-45, Vellore District Collector Office, Vellore – 632 009 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudiyattam, Near RTO Office, Gandhi Nagar, Gudiyattam – 632 602 3.The Tahsildar, Pernambut Taluk, Vellore District 635 810 WP.No.39322 of 2025 17.10.2025 (2/2) 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis