Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 57992 (MAD)

Govindaraj v. The District Collector,

WP/28939/2026 · 2026-07-27

Krishnan Ramasamy

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP No. 28939 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY WP No. 28939 of 2026 Govindaraj ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The District Collector, Dharmapuri District. 2. The District Revenue Officer Dharmapuri District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Revenue Division Office, Dharmapuri District. 4. The Tahsildar Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District. 5. Chandiran 6. Subramani 7. Annamalai 8. Muniyappan 9. K.C. Muniyappan, 10.Minor Pranesh S/o. Muniyappan, Represented by Natural Guardian and mother Rani, Gangapalayam, Panjapalli, Dharmapuri D638 812 ..Respondent(s) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 28939 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 5 Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd and 4th Respondent to consider the petitioner representation dated 28.11.2024 by conducting enquiry for the property situated at Panchapalli Village, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District, comprised in Survey No.281/3 to an extent of Acre5.50 cents and to dispose the same in accordance with law within a time frame to be fixed by this Honble Court For Petitioner(s): Mr.P.Thirumalaivasan For Respondent(s): Mr.C.Prabakaran, Government Counsel ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner representation dated 28.11.2024. 2. "The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had submitted a representation dated 28.11.2024, seeking the cancellation of patta nos. 842, 840, 1491, and 1681, which were allegedly issued in respect of the lands comprised in Survey No. 281/3, measuring 5.50 cents, situated at Panchapalli Village, Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District. The representation further sought a proper enquiry and the restoration of the petitioner’s father’s name in the revenue records. However, till date, no action has been taken on the same. Hence, the present Writ Petition https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 28939 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 5 3. In reply, Mr.C.Prabakaran, learned Government Counsel who takes notice on behalf of the respondents would submit that the petitioner’s representation dated 28.11.2024 will be disposed of by the 4th respondent within a period of eight weeks. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Counsel for the respondents and also perused the materials available on record. 5. In view of the above, this Court directs the 4th respondent to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 28.11.2024 on its own merits and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, after issuing notice to the petitioner as well as the private respondents 5 to 10 and shall also afford them with an opportunity of personal hearing. 6. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 27-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No sk https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 28939 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 5 1. The District Collector, Dharmapuri District. 2. The District Revenue Officer Dharmapuri District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Revenue Division Office, Dharmapuri District. 4. The Tahsildar Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri District. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 28939 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 5 KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. sk WP No. 28939 of 2026 27-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis