1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.03.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN Writ Petition (MD).No.1921 of 2011 K.Sethupathi .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Assistant Director District Surveyor Office, Theni. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Periyakulam, Theni District. 3.The Tahsildar, Periyakulam, Theni District. .. Respondents Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to consider the representation dated 30.09.2010 seeking to rectify the mistake that had crept in chitta during UDR survey as regards the measurement of the land comprised in Survey No.1161/1, Vadaveeranayakkanpatti in the light of the first respondent proceedings in O.Mu.A3/5126/10, dated 07.10.2010, within the period to be stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ajmal Khan For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasubramanian Addl.Govt.Pleader ORDER The petitioners father purchased an extent of one acre and 60 cents in S.F.No.1161/1, Vadaveeranayakkanpatti, Theni District, by virtue of a sale deed dated 05.03.1974. His father died in the year 2008. When he had applied for chitta, instead of mentioning one acre and 60 cents, it was mentioned as one acre and 40 cents. Therefore, he made a representation dated 23.12.2009 along with the copy of the sale deed and also requested to conduct the survey to verify the real extent. 2. According to the petitioner, the Firkka Surveyor though carried out survey, thereafter, assured that he would rectify the mistake, no action is taken till date, in spite of representations dated 23.12.2009 and 30.09.2010. On receipt of the representations, the first respondent forwarded the representation to the third https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 respondent on 07.10.2010. However, till date, no order has been passed. Hence, he seeks for a Mandamus to consider the representations of the petitioner. 3. The learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice and he would only contend that the Tahsildar has to make an enquiry and the petitioner has to produce all the documents and evidences and notices have to be given to the adjacent owners also, as any alteration at this stage would affect the third parties rights. Hence, he would only contend that the respondents may be directed to consider the representation of the petitioner by taking note of the above said aspect. Heard both sides. 4. Considering the limited scope in the Writ Petition, the Tahsildar is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 30.09.2010 after giving due notice to the petitioner besides adjacent owners of the property in question and also if any other parities interested in the subject property and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. The representation of the petitioner shall be disposed of within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above observation, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (P&A) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Assistant Director District Surveyor Office, Theni. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Periyakulam, Theni District. 3.The Tahsildar, Periyakulam, Theni District. +1 CC to Special Government Pleader (SR.No.6438) +1 CC to Mr.M.Ajmal Khan, Advocate (SR.No.6637) W.P.(MD).No.1921 of 2011 14.03.2011 ssm NSV/5.4.11/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/