Judgment : 1. According to the Petitioner, he has purchased the land in S.No.75/1 measuring 2 acres and 94 cents and in S.No.75/2 measuring 60 cents from one Mathirikumari, wife of Chandramohan in the capacity of Power Agent of her principal in the year 2008. Although the Petitioner has submitted necessary documents to get the sale deed register on 15/7/2008, the Sub-Registrar, Thirumangalam had not registered the same stating that there was a proceeding pending with regard to the lands between the owner of the land and the Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Department. 2. The Petitioner approached this Court in W.P.(MD) No.12319 of 2008 praying for issuance of a Mandamus in directing the Sub-Registrar, before whom the sale deed was pending, who registered and to return back the documents to him. However, this Court in W.P.(MD) No.12319 of 2008 on 3/9/2009 was pleased to direct the Sub-Registrar, Thirumangalam Taluk to register and release the document, subject to the Petitioner's complying with the other infirmities pointed out by the Sub-Registrar. On fulfilling the infirmities pointed out by the Sub-Registrar, Thirumangalam, by way of sale deed in regard to the lands in S.Nos.75/1 and 75/2 was registered and the document was released as such, the Petitioner is the owner of the land. Since he is the owner of the lands, along with necessary documents, he made a representation dated 23/11/2011 to the respondent in person on 23/11/2011 itself requesting to issue patta to him for the land in S.Nos.75/1 and 75/2. Although, the Respondent had received the representation, but had not issued patta in favour of the Petitioner, as such, the Petitioner is left with no option but to file the instant Writ of Mandamus. 3. In view of the fact that the Petitioner has made only a limited request to consider his representation dated 23/11/2011 addressed to the Respondent/Tahsildar, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District and another representation dated 6/3/2013 (addressed to the Tahsildar, Thirumangalam), this Court in the interest of Fair Play and even as an equitable relief, directs the Petitioner to furnish a copy of its representations dated 23/11/2011 and 6/3/2013 to the Respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of the said copy of the representation as stated supra, the Respondent is directed to consider the representations of the Petitioner dated 23/11/2011 and 6/3/2013 in a fair, just and objective fashion and to pass appropriate orders within a period of six weeks thereafter (of course, after providing due opportunities to the parties concerned. 4. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.