WP No. 21860 of 2025 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-07-2026 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY W.P. No. 21860 of 2025 M.Lakshmanan ..Petitioner Vs 1. The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvannamalai. 3. The Tahsildar, Thiruvannamalai Taluk, Thiruvannamalai. 4. Ramamoorthy 5. Dhanapal ..Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 herein to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 02.04.2025 and pass appropriate orders to cancel the order passed by the third respondent on 12.12.2017 within a time frame. For Petitioner Mr. C.Munusamy For RR 1 to 3 Ms. Inthu Karunakaran Govenment's Counsel - - - - - https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 21860 of 2025 __________ Page2 of 4 ORDER This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 02.04.2025 and pass appropriate orders to cancel the proceedings issued by the third respondent on 12.12.2017 within a time frame. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since the private respondents (respondents 4 and 5), pursuant to the proceedings dated 12.12.2017 of the third respondent (Tahsildar) cancelling the patta issued to the petitioner’s mother sans notice, tried to demolish the petitioner’s house and put up a fencing, the petitioner addressed a representation dated 02.04.2025 to the official respondents (respondents 1 to 3); however, since his representation did not evoke any response, this writ petition has been filed seeking the aforesaid relief. 3. Ms. Inthu Karunakaran, learned Government Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the official respondents. Notice to private respondents is dispensed with, inasmuch as no order prejudicial to their interest is passed. 4. Learned Government Counsel would submit that the petitioner’s representation dated 02.04.2025 will be considered and appropriate orders will https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 21860 of 2025 __________ Page3 of 4 be passed by the second respondent within a period of eight weeks. 5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the limited scope of the relief sought in the writ petition, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, directs the second respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 02.04.2025, after issuing due notice to the petitioner and other aggrieved persons, if any, on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. 20-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SRM https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 21860 of 2025 __________ Page4 of 4 KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. SRM To 1. The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvannamalai. 3. The Tahsildar, Thiruvannamalai Taluk, Thiruvannamalai. W.P. No. 21860 of 2025 20-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis