Judgment :- 1. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider and decide the petitioner's petition dated 22.07.2011, moved under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act, for modification of patta. 2. The submission of the petitioner is that the property mentioned in the schedule A & B of the petition, was purchased by the grand father and father of petitioner, by way of registered sale deed. The patta pass book was issued in the name of grand father and father of petitioner, who were in possession and enjoyment of the property. 3. A part of the property wassold to one Gobal, S/o. Perumal Reddy, by way of sale deed No.174/1975. Except the property mentioned in the sale deed, no other property was sold to Gobal. 4. The case of the petitioner is that Gobal prepared forged documents and sold the property, not belonging to him. On the basis of the purchase, the alleged purchaser filed application with respondent no.1, for change of patta in their names, on the basis of the sale deed executed in their favour. 5. The respondent no.1 allowed the application and issued patta pass book in favour of respondents 3 to 6. The order was passed without notice to the petitioner. In view of the fact that the petitioner was not made party to the proceedings before respondent no.1, he moved application under Section 10 of the Act, for change of patta pass book entry, back in the name of petitioner. 6. Section 10 of Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act reads as under: "10. Modification of entries in the patta pass book:- (1) Where any person claims that may modification is required in respect of any entry in the patta pass book already issued under Section 3 either by reason of the death of any person or by reason of the transfer of interest in the land or by reason of any other subsequent change in circumstances, he shall make an application to the Tahsildar for the modification of the relevant entries in the patta pass book. (2) An application under sub-section (1) shall contain such particulars as may be prescribed and shall be accompanied by the documents, if any, relied on by the applicant as evidence in support of his claim. (2) An application under sub-section (1) shall contain such particulars as may be prescribed and shall be accompanied by the documents, if any, relied on by the applicant as evidence in support of his claim. (3) (a) Before passing an order on an application under sub section (1), the Tahsildar shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed and shall also give a reasonable opportunity to the parties concerned to make their representations either orally or in writing. If the Tahsildar decides that any modification should be made in respect of entries in the patta pass book, he shall pass an order accordingly and shall make such consequential changes in the patta pass book, as appear to him to be necessary for giving effect to his order. (b) If the Tahsildar decides that there is no case for effecting any modification in the entries in the patta pass book, he shall reject the application. (c) An order under clause (a) or clause (b) shall contain the reasons for such order and shall be communicated to the parties concerned in such manner as may be prescribed." 7. The case of the petitioner is that though statutory application under Section 10, was filed by petitioner on 22.07.2011, till date, the Tahsildar has not taken any action on the application and has not even issued notice to respondent nos. 2 to 9. 8. Learned counsel for the State, contends that application moved by petitioner was not competent before the Tahsildar, as under Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act, remedy with the petitioner is to file appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, therefore, prayer of the petitioner cannot be accepted, and furthermore, no writ in the nature of Mandamus can be issued to the respondent no.1, to consider the application of petitioner, as the Tahsildar has no jurisdiction, to review the order earlier passed. 9. On consideration, I find no force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the State. It is only where a person is party to the proceedings before Tahsildar, that the remedy of appeal is available. The very object of incorporating Section 10 of the Act is that where the person affected by order has not been heard by the Tahsildar, he can avail statutory remedy to move for modification, by moving application under Section 10 of the Act. 10. The very object of incorporating Section 10 of the Act is that where the person affected by order has not been heard by the Tahsildar, he can avail statutory remedy to move for modification, by moving application under Section 10 of the Act. 10. The provisions of Section 10 are similar to Order 9 Rule 13 of the code for setting aside the exparte decree. 11. Respondent no.1, therefore under statutory obligation, has to consider and decide the application, either to accept or reject it, but he cannot sit over it without proceeding further in the matter. The respondent no.1, thus, has failed to perform his duty, under Statute. 12. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed. A writ in the nature of Mandamus is issued, to respondent no.1 to immediately proceed with the application, moved by the petitioner under Section 10 of the Act and take a final decision after issuing notice to the parties concerned. 13. The final order be passed on application expeditiously, but not later than six months of receipt of certified copy of this order. No costs.