Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9084 (MAD)

K.VANITHA v. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

WP/45677/2025 · 2026-07-27

Krishnan Ramasamy

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP No. 45677 of 2025 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY WP No. 45677 of 2025 K.Vanitha W/o.Kathavarayan No.13, Arundhathiyar Palayam, Morappakkam Village And Post, Madurantakam Taluk, Chengalpattu District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The District Collector Office Of The Collectorate, Chengalpattu, Chengalpattu District. 2. The District Revenue Officer Office Of The Dro, Chengalpattu, Chengalpattu District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Office Of The Rdo, Chengalpattu District. 4. The Tahsildar Madurantakam Taluk, Chengalpattu District. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 4th Respondent to consider the Representation dated 15.04.2025 accordance with law and issue a patta in favour of the petitioner for the property comprised in Grama Natham Survey No.629/ 16, for an extent of 8 cents, situated at Morappakkam village, Madurantakam Taluk, Chengalpattu District. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 45677 of 2025 __________ Page2 of 4 For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.Duraimurugan For Respondent(s): Ms.Inthu Karunakaran, Govt. counsel Order This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.04.2026. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in this case, the petitioner filed a representation dated 15.04.2026 before the respondents, requesting them for issuance of patta, pertaining to the subject property, in favour of the petitioner. However, the said representation was not at all considered by the respondent till date. Hence, this petition. 3. In reply, the learned counsel for the official respondent would submit that the petitioner’s representation will be disposed of within a period of 6 weeks and hence, she requests this Court to pass appropriate orders. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the respondent and also perused the entire materials available on record. 5. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, this Court directs the 4th respondent to consider the representation of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 45677 of 2025 __________ Page3 of 4 the petitioner dated 15.04.2026 and after issuing notice to all the concerned parties, dispose of the same, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No cost. 27-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No nsa To 1. The District Collector Office Of The Collectorate, Chengalpattu, Chengalpattu District. 2. The District Revenue Officer Office Of The Dro, Chengalpattu, Chengalpattu District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Office Of The Rdo, Chengalpattu District. 4. The Tahsildar Madurantakam Taluk, Chengalpattu District. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 45677 of 2025 __________ Page4 of 4 KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J. nsa WP No. 45677 of 2025 27-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis