Facts
The petitioners applied online for a survey and separate patta concerning land in Survey Nos. 155/8 and 155/9, Arur Village, Mohanur Taluk.
Source reference: para. 1; pp. 3–4The Tahsildar rejected the application on 30 March 2025.
Source reference: para. 1; pp. 3–4The petitioners contended that the rejection was non-speaking and made without notice, enquiry, or an opportunity to be heard.
Source reference: paras. 2, 5; pp. 3–4They later submitted representations seeking survey, demarcation, and separate patta, but no effective action followed.
Source reference: paras. 1–2, 5; pp. 3–4They therefore sought certiorari to quash the rejection and a direction for the requested survey and patta process.
Source reference: paras. 1–2, 5; pp. 3–4Issues
1. Whether the Tahsildar’s rejection of the petitioners’ application was liable to be set aside for being non-speaking and passed without notice, enquiry, or an opportunity of hearing.
Source reference: paras. 2, 5; pp. 3–42. Whether the petitioners’ claim for survey, demarcation, and separate patta should be reconsidered by the Tahsildar after hearing the concerned parties.
Source reference: para. 6; p. 5Law Applied
The Court applied the principles of natural justice, including the requirement that a person affected by a proposed adverse decision be given notice and an opportunity to be heard.
Source reference: no citationIt also required the administrative decision to be reasoned and made after proper enquiry.
Source reference: no citationNo specific statutory provision or judicial precedent was cited in the order.
Source reference: no citationReasoning
The Court found that the rejection was non-speaking and had been issued without notice to the petitioners or a proper enquiry with the parties concerned.
Source reference: paras. 5–6; pp. 4–5Since the application could be rejected only after giving the petitioners an opportunity for a personal hearing, the procedure followed violated natural justice.
Source reference: paras. 5–6; pp. 4–5The Court accordingly held the rejection unsustainable, while leaving the merits of the petitioners’ claim for survey, demarcation, and separate patta to be determined on reconsideration.
Source reference: paras. 5–6; pp. 4–5Holding
The Court set aside the Tahsildar’s rejection dated 30 March 2025 and remanded the matter to the Tahsildar, Mohanur Taluk.
The Tahsildar was directed to issue notice to the petitioners and other joint pattadars, provide an opportunity for personal hearing, consider the relevant records and parties’ contentions, and pass appropriate orders on the claim in accordance with law within 16 weeks of receiving the order.
Source reference: paras. 6–7; p. 5The writ petition was disposed of; the two connected miscellaneous petitions were allowed, and no costs were ordered.
Source reference: paras. 6–7; p. 5Original Court PDF
JAGATHEESWARI SELLAIHAvsTHE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
