logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MHC 1005 print Preview print Next print
Court : High Court of Judicature at Madras
Case No : W.A. No. 216 of 2026 & C.M.P. No. 1961 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED
Parties : Mayadevi Versus The District Collector, District Collectorate Office, Thiruvallur & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Appellant: B. Vijay for G. Mohammed Aseef, Advocates. For the Respondents: C. Gauthamaraj, Government Advocate.
Date of Judgment : 16-02-2026
Head Note :-
Letters Patent - Clause XV -
Summary :-
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Clause XV of Letters Patent
- Tamil Nadu Patta Passbook Act, 1983

2. Catch Words:
- mandamus
- writ
- rejection order
- online application
- representation

3. Summary:
The appellant filed an intra‑Court appeal under Clause XV of the Letters Patent against the order granting a writ of mandamus directing the Tahsildar to consider the petitioner’s online application for a computerized patta. The appellant contended that the Tahsildar’s WhatsApp communication did not constitute a formal rejection and therefore could not be challenged, seeking mandamus instead. The Court observed that no formal rejection order existed under the Tamil Nadu Patta Passbook Act, 1983, and that the mandamus issued by the learned Judge sufficed. The petitioner may now present a representation with the court’s order to the Tahsildar, who can pass a merit‑based order. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of without any order as to costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

4. Conclusion:
Appeal Dismissed
Judgment :-

(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent, against the order dated 24.11.2025 in W.P.No.45721 of 2025.)

R. Suresh Kumar, J.

1. This intra-Court appeal has been directed against the order dated 24.11.2025 made in W.P.No.45721 of 2025.

2. The appellant was the writ petitioner who filed the said writ petition seeking for a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 3 & 4 to issue computerized patta in favour of the petitioner in respect of Survey No.38 to an extent of Acre 0.67 cents out of Acre 1.41 situated at No.47, Melmalaigaipattu Village, Uthukottai Taluk, Thiruvallur District on the strength of petitioner’s sale deed vide Document No.2646 of 2025 dated 16.04.2025 on the file of Sub Registrar Office, Arani and vendors Patta No.1283.

3. The learned Judge tagged the said writ petition along with two other writ petitions with similar prayer and thereby, allowed all the writ petitions by directing the Revenue Tahsildar concerned to consider the respective applications filed by the respective writ petitioners online and pass orders thereon on merits and in accordance with law wherever there is no litigation pending before the civil Court.

4. Since a mandamus has been sought for which has been ordered by the learned Judge through the impugned order, we do not find any grievance to be espoused by the appellant herein, nevertheless, the present intra-Court appeal has been preferred and in support of the writ appeal, Mr.B.Vijay, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that, since there has been no order of rejection passed on the application online submitted by the appellant / petitioner and only a whatsApp rejection order has been communicated, the same could not be challenged. Therefore, the said whatsApp rejection order passed by the Tahsildar cannot be construed as a rejection order, that is the reason why only the mandamus was sought for.

5. Be that as it may, if there is no order in the eye of law passed by the Tahsildar concerned under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Patta Passbook Act, 1983, the same need not be taken into account as if it is a rejection order. When that being so, on the strength of the mandamus that has been issued by the learned Judge, which is impugned herein in the writ petition filed by the appellant / petitioner, whatever further course of action to implement the said order can be pursued by the writ petitioner by giving a representation along with the copy of the said order of the writ Court as well as the present order and once it is made to the Tahsildar concerned, it is open to the Tahsildar to pass orders on merits and in accordance with law on the application online submitted by the appellant / petitioner in order to execute a direction that has been given by the writ Court through the impugned order by issuance of mandamus.

6. With these observations, this Writ Appeal is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
 
  CDJLawJournal