1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.03.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN W.P.(MD)No.50 of 2011 C.Mohandhas, Committee President, Arulmiga Madam Thampuram Esakkiamman Kovil, Kunnathoor, Pudukkada P.O., Kanyakumari District. : Petitioner Vs. 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Padmanabhapuram, At Thuckalay, Thuckalay P.O., Kanyakumari District, Pin:629 163 2.The Tahsildar, Vilavancode Taluk, At Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District, Pin:629163. 3.St.George Mission, Munchirai, Pudukkada Post, Kanyakumari District, Pin: 629171. Represented by Parish Priest, St. George Church, Munchirai, Kanyakumari District. 4.Reve. Fr.John Thekkel, St. George Mission, Munchirai, Pudukkada Post, Kanyakumari District. Pin: 629171. : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 & 2 to consider and dispose of the petitioner's lawyer notice No.38/2009, dated 10.11.2009 addressed to them within the time to be fixed by this Court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 For Petitioner : Mr.K.N.Thampi For R1 & R2 : Mr.K.A.Nandagopan Addl. Govt. Pleader For R3 & R4 : Mr.R.Alagumani O R D E R The failure on the part of the respondents 1 & 2 to respond to the lawyer notice issued by the petitioner on 10.11.2009, compelled him to file this Writ petition. 2. The property in old Survey No.1727 of Kunnathoor Village, Vilavancode Taluk in the District of Kanyakumari, belongs to the family of the petitioner. The patta of the property was granted to them. According to the petitioner, there were proceedings between himself and fourth respondent including civil suit in O.S.No.18 of 1984. The third respondent exerted influence and obtained a tax receipt dated 28.05.2008 in their name, with respect to a portion of the property. Subsequently, the respondents 1 & 2 issued patta after sub-dividing the property. The patta was granted in favour of the fourth respondent. The grievance of the petitioner pertains to the sub-division made by the respondents 1 & 2 on 09.09.2009. Since there was no follow up action taken by the respondents 1 & 2 on the basis of the request made by the petitioner to correct the records, he was constrained to issue a lawyer notice on 10.11.2009. Still there was no response and therefore, he was constrained to file the Writ petition. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 4. The grievance of the petitioner pertains to the sub-division made by the respondents 1 & 2. Though lawyer notice was issued, nothing indicated in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ petition indicating that a representation was submitted before the respondents 1 & 2 against the sub-division and to get the revenue records corrected suitably. 5. Therefore, I am of the view that liberty should be given to the petitioner to submit a representation before the second respondent. 6. Accordingly, the second respondent is granted four weeks time to submit a representation before the second respondent with respect to the sub-division of property and in the event of making any such representation, the second respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the same on merits and as per law as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of twelve weeks thereafter with an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondents 3 & 4. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 7. The Writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No Costs. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (LA) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Padmanabhapuram, At Thuckalay, Thuckalay P.O., Kanyakumari District, Pin:629 163 2.The Tahsildar, Vilavancode Taluk, At Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District, Pin:629163. +1 CC to Mr.K.N.Thampi, Advocate (SR.No.11205) +1 CC to Mr.R.Alagumani, Advocate (SR.No.10953) +1 CC to Special Government Pleader (SR.No.11460) W.P.(MD)No.50 of 2011 02.03.2011 pm NSV/21.3.11/3P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/