1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.03.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN W.P.(MD).No.2710 of 2011 K.Masilamani : Petitioner Vs 1. The District Collector Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli 2. The District Revenue Officer Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to take on its file the revision preferred by the petitioner dated 08.02.2010 as against the order passed by the third respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka. A3/858/2008 dated 12.01.2010 and consequently direct the second respondent to dispose the revision petition within the stipulated time. For petitioner : Mr.C.Mayil Vahana Rajendran For Respondents : Mr. K.Balasubramanian, Additional Government Pleader O R D E R The petitioner has come forward with this Writ Petition seeking to direct the second respondent to take on its file the revision preferred by the petitioner, dated 08.02.2010 as against the order passed by the third respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka. A3/858/2008 dated 12.01.2010 and consequently direct the second respondent to dispose the revision petition within the stipulated time. 2. The only grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has filed a revision as against the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, dated 12.01.2010, before the District Revenue Officer, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of that order and the revision is pending before the District Revenue Officer from 08.02.2010. He would submit that even though the revision has been preferred in time on 08.02.2010, so far he has not received any communication nor granted any number regarding the pendency of the revision petition. Therefore, he has come forward with this Writ Petition seeking to dispose the revision petition within the stipulated time. 3. The learned Additional Government Pleader put on notice, verified and reported that the revision has been filed by the petitioner as against the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer before the District Revenue https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 Officer and the same is pending. 4. Taking into consideration of the limited request, suffice to direct the second respondent to take up the revision and to communicate the same to the petitioner regarding the pendency of the revision petition along with number and dispose the revision filed by the petitioner in the usual course as early as possible. SD ASST REGISTRAR ( CO ) /TRUE COPY/ SUB ASST REGISTRAR vsg To 1.The District Collector Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli 2.The District Revenue Officer Tirunelveli District Tirunelveli 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer Tirunelveli District Tirunelveli 1CC TO MR. C. MAYIL VAHANA RAJENDRAN, ADVOCATE, SR: 8134: 1CC TO THE SPL. GOVT PLEADER SR: 8334: DM:2011::APRIL:12::: W.P.(MD).No.2710 of 2011 25.03.2011 2P:6C:: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/