Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 3807 (MAD)

M. Magendran v. District Collector, Thanjavur

2014-10-14

M.VENUGOPAL

body2014
Judgment : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 2. According to the petitioner, he made representations on 08.09.2014 and 26.09.2014 before the respondents 1 to 4 making a request to take appropriate action in rectifying the measurement of the existing pathway in Survey No.21/3, Viachery Village, Papanasam Taluk, Thanjavur District and to correct the mistake from 2.6 meters and to restore the correct measurement as 1 1/4 kajam (1.3 meters) by considering his representations as stated supra. 3. The plea of the petitioner is that in the revenue records of the year 1922 and the sketch, it is mentioned that the pathway in Survey No.21/3 measuring an extent of 1 1/4 kajam (1.3 meters) which was subsequently in the year 1987 while taking UDR proceedings, the said pathway was wrongly mentioned as 2.6 meters instead of 1 1/4 kajam (1.3 meters). Further more, the mentioning of 2.6 meters breadth in respect of the pathway will affect his right and the pathway mentioning as 2.6 meters cannot be formed without encroaching upon the petitioner's patta land. As such, the update conducted in the year 1987 has to be rectified and the existence of pathway on reality is only 1 1/4 kajam (1.3 meters) and the same has to be restored, otherwise the petitioner will be put to serious prejudice and great hardship. 4. In view of the fact that the prayer of the petitioner in the present writ petition is limited in nature viz., to the effect that the respondents are to consider his representations dated 08.09.2014 and 26.09.2014, this Court on the basis of equity, fair play, good conscience and even as a matter of prudence, directs the second respondent/District Revenue Officer, Thanjavur District (who is purported to be the appropriate Officer) to consider the representations of the petitioner as stated supra within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Of course, after providing adequate opportunities to the petitioner and others concerned if any by adhering to the principles of natural justice. Of course, after providing adequate opportunities to the petitioner and others concerned if any by adhering to the principles of natural justice. It is made clear that the second respondent/District Revenue Officer, Thanjavur District is directed to pass a fair, just order on merits by taking into consideration of the petitioner's representations dated 08.09.2014 and 26.09.2014 respectively in a dispassionate manner uninfluenced with any of the observations made by this Court. With the aforesaid direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.