logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide

24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MHC 2742 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Judicature at Madras
Case No : WP No. 9004 of 2026 & WMP Nos. 9727 to 9729 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
Parties : C. Bhaskaran & Another Versus The District collector Office of District Collector Udhagamandalam Nilgiris & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioners: M. Vijayamehanath, Advocate. For the Respondents: D. Ravichander, SGP.
Date of Judgment : 12-03-2026
Head Note :-
Subject
Judgment :-

(Prayer: calling for records pertaining to the issuance of order in proceedings in 2026/0103/11/000095 dated 21.1.2026 on the file of the 4th respondent and quash the same as unjust illegal, arbitrary, and non-speaking order and further direct the 4th respondent to issue patta in name of the petitioners.)

1. WMP. No.9727 of 2026 is ordered subject to the payment of separate court fee.

2. This writ petition has been filed, challenging the impugned order dated 21.01.2026 passed by the 4th respondent, rejecting the petitioners’ application seeking for issuance of Patta for the property, morefully described in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition.

3. The petitioners have challenged the impugned order on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice and also on the ground that the impugned order is a non-speaking order.

4. Mr.D.Ravichander, learned Special Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

5. Admittedly, the petitioners were communicated about the rejection of their application seeking for issuance of Patta only through a WhatsApp message. As seen from the said WhatsApp message, challenged in this writ petition, the 4th respondent has stated that the subject property is a forest land and therefore, Patta cannot be granted in favour of the petitioners.

6. However, as seen from the impugned communication, the supporting documents produced by the petitioners in support of their application seeking for issuance of Patta for the subject property have not been considered. Further, the petitioners were not afforded any opportunity of hearing by the 4th respondent before issuing the impugned communication.

7. Since the impugned communication is a non-speaking order and has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, necessarily, the impugned order has to be quashed and the matter has to be remanded back to the 4th respondent for fresh consideration, on merits and in accordance with law.

8. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of and the impugned order dated 21.01.2026 passed by the fourth respondent is hereby quashed and the matter is remanded back to the fourth respondent for fresh consideration, on merits and in accordance with law.

9. The petitioners are directed to submit a written explanation to the fourth respondent along with the supporting documents, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the said written explanation within the stipulated time, the fourth respondent shall pass final orders, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving due consideration to the explanation as well as the supporting documents to be produced by the petitioners, within a period of 4 weeks thereafter. Consequently, connected WMPs are closed. No costs.

 
  CDJLawJournal