CMP No. 12059 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE N. MALA CMP No. 12059 of 2026 AND WA NO. 3277 OF 2023 1. S. Ramachandran S/o.Sarangapani, Eachankaranai Post Chengalpet Tk, Kanchipuram Dist. 2. S.Arumugam S/o.Sarangapani, Eachankaranai Post Chengalpet Tk, Kanchipuram Dist. ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. The District Collector Kanchipuram District, Kancheepuram. 2. The District Revenue Officer Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram. 3. The Tahsildar Chengalpet Tk., Chengalpet, Kancheepuram Dist. 4. The Vice-President Village Panchayat, Kunnavakkam Village, Chengalpet Tk., Kancheepuram Dist. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMP No. 12059 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 7 ..Respondent(s) WA No. 3277 of 2023 1. S. Ramachandran S/o.Sarangapani, Eachankaranai Post, Chengalpet Tk, Kanchipuram Dist. 2. S. Arumugam S/o.Sarangapani, Eachankaranai Post, Chengalpet Tk, Kanchipuram Dist. ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. The District Collector Kanchipuram Dist, Kanchipuram. 2. The District Revenue Officer Kanchipuram Dist, Kanchipuram. 3. The Tahsildar Chengalpet Tk, Chengalpet, Kanchipuram Dist. 4. The Vice-President Village Panchayat, Kunnavakkam Village, Chengalpet Tk, Kanchipuram Dist. ..Respondent(s) CMP No. 12059 of 2026 To condone the delay of 139 days in filing restorate petition in WA. WA No. 3277 of 2023 To allow the above W.A by setting aside the order dated 24-08- 2022 passe in W.P.No.25863 of 2014. CMP No. 12059 of 2026 For Appellant(s): MR.R.Abdul Mubeen For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Surendar, Ga For R1 To R3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMP No. 12059 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 7 Order (Order of the Court was made by Dr.G.Jayachandran J.) (1) The petitioners herein, aggrieved by the proceedings of the 2nd respondent herein, namely, the District Revenue Officer, dated 04.05.2012, wherein, the patta granted to the petitioners, was cancelled subsequently on being found that the patta in respect of the land under the Inam Abolition Act, was granted by the officer without any document of possession or proof of carrying on agricultural activity. (2) The learned Single Judge, considering the contentions of the petitioners herein, found that there was no error in exercise of power by the authority who had passed the impugned order and if at all, the writ petitioners are aggrieved by the aforesaid order, they can avail the right of revision available before the Commissioner of Land Administration. Hence, while dismissing the writ petition, the learned Single Judge has granted liberty to the writ petitioners to file appropriate revision before the Commissioner of Land Administration, if so advised and if any revision is filed, the authorities to pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible. (3) Not being satisfied with the order of the learned Single Judge, the writ petitioners had preferred an intra Court Appeal in WA.No.3277/2023. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMP No. 12059 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 7 Earlier, when the matter was taken up for final hearing, there was no representation on behalf of the appellants/writ petitioners. Hence, the writ appeal was dismissed for default on 30.10.2025. The appellants / writ petitioners had taken out an application to restore the writ appeal, with a delay of 139 days. When the application for condonation of delay came up for consideration on an earlier occasion, this Court, on perusing the affidavit, found that no acceptable reason available to condone the delay. However, to afford an opportunity to the petitioners/appellants, permitted the learned counsel for the petitioners to make his submissions on merit. (4) Accordingly, today the learned counsel for the petitioners made his submissions. However, this Court found that the challenge to the impugned order of the 2nd respondent on the ground of lack of jurisdiction, is not sustainable. At that juncture, the learned counsel sought leave of this Court to withdraw the writ appeal and to extend the time for the petitioners to prefer the revision before the Commissioner of Land Administration, to work out their remedy, as permitted by the learned Single Judge. (5) Considering the plea, we dispose of CMP.No.12059/2026 and WA.No.3277/2026, filed to condone the delay of 139 days in filing the restoration petition, in the following terms:- (a)CMP.No.12059/2026 is allowed. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMP No. 12059 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 7 (b)The writ appeal in WA.No.3277/2023, is dismissed as withdrawn. (c) Liberty is given to the petitioners herein to approach the Commissioner of Land Administration, by way of a revision petition within a period of thirty days [30 days] from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (G.J.,J.) (N.M.,J.) 23-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No AP https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMP No. 12059 of 2026 __________ Page6 of 7 CMP No. 12059 of 2026 To 1. The District Collector Kanchipuram District, Kancheepuram. 2. The District Revenue Officer Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram. 3. The Tahsildar Chengalpet Tk., Chengalpet, Kancheepuram Dist. 4. The Vice-President Village Panchayat, Kunnavakkam Village, Chengalpet Tk., Kancheepuram Dist. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMP No. 12059 of 2026 __________ Page7 of 7 DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN J. AND N.MALA J. AP CMP No. 12059 of 2026 AND WA NO. 3277 OF 2023 23-06-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis