Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1094 (MAD)

S.RANI v. The Revenue Divisional Officer,

WP/12814/2026 · 2026-04-01

Abdul Quddhose

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

W.P.No.12814 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 01.04.2026 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE W.P.No.12814 of 2026 and W.M.P.No.14027 of 2026 S.Rani ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Collectorate Office, Sathuvachari, Vellore District. 2.The Revenue Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Tharapadavedu Village, Katpadi – 632 007, Vellore District. 3.The Taluk Surveyor, Tahsildar Office, Tharapadavedu Village, Katpadi – 632 007, Vellore District. 4.G.Chakarapani ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to Page No.1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12814 of 2026 3 to consider petitioner’s representation dated 17.03.2026 and forebear them from conducting survey or taking measurements in petitioner’s lands measuring 0.26 cents bearing S.No.413/28 (Old SF.No.413/1A1A1A) in Tharapadavedu village, katpadi Taluk, Vellore District on the basis of an undisclosed representation given by the 4th respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Manoharan For Respondents : Mr.D.Ravichander Special Government Pleader [R1 to R3] Notice dispensed with [R4] ***** ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed to forbear the respondents 1 to 3 from conducting survey and demarcation of boundaries of the property morefully disclosed in the prayer to this writ petition. 2. Mr.D.Ravichander, learned Special Government Pleader, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. Since no adverse order is passed against the 4th respondent in this writ petition, notice to the 4th respondent is dispensed with by this Court. Page No.2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12814 of 2026 3. According to the petitioner, she is the absolute owner of the property morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition. It is her case that based on the representation of the 4th respondent, the official respondents, namely respondents 1 to 3 are attempting to conduct survey in the petitioner’s property. According to the petitioner, the same is therefore illegal. She had given a representation on 17.03.2026 to the respondents 1 to 3 raising objections with regard to the proposed survey over the petitioner’s property based on the representation of the 4th respondent. 4. Till date, the survey and demarcation of boundaries has not been commenced by the respondents 1 to 3 over the property morefully disclosed in the prayer to this writ petition. Even before a final decision is taken by the respondents 1 to 3 with regard to the 4th respondent’s request for survey and demarcation of boundaries, the petitioner has approached this Court prematurely by filing this writ petition. However, necessarily, the objections raised by the petitioner through her representation dated 17.03.2026 have to be considered by the respondents 1 to 3 before taking a final decision as to whether the survey and demarcation of boundaries Page No.3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12814 of 2026 over the property morefully disclosed in the prayer to this writ petition can be done or not. 5. Since this writ petition has been prematurely filed, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the petitioner’s representation, dated 17.03.2026 raising objections with regard to the proposed survey of the property morefully described in the prayer to this writ petition, based on the 4th respondent’s representation, on merits and in accordance with law, and only thereafter, a final decision can be taken by the respondents 1 to 3 to survey the subject property based on the 4th respondent’s representation. In case, the objections of the petitioner as raised in her representation, dated 17.03.2026 is rejected by the respondents 1 to 3, the rejection order should contain reasons as to why the petitioner’s objections are rejected. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 01.04.2026 Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No sp Page No.4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12814 of 2026 To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Collectorate Office, Sathuvachari, Vellore District. 2.The Revenue Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Tharapadavedu Village, Katpadi – 632 007, Vellore District. 3.The Taluk Surveyor, Tahsildar Office, Tharapadavedu Village, Katpadi – 632 007, Vellore District. Page No.5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12814 of 2026 ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J. sp W.P.No.12814 of 2026 01.04.2026 Page No.6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis