AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 21.05.2026 passed by the 2nd respondent, whereby the 2nd respondent rejected the petitioner's application dated 16.03.2026 to transfer the patta from the name of her deceased husband to the name of the petitioner and her children, without issuing any notice to the petitioner and without assigning any reasons therein.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner’s husband had purchased the property in Survey No. 349/15C1, measuring an extent of 3,362 sq. ft., situated at Muppadhuvetti Village, Arcot Taluk, Ranipet District, by virtue of a registered Sale Deed dated 09.08.1991, registered as Doc. No. 1547 of 1991. Subsequently, the petitioner’s husband passed away on 11.06.2000, leaving behind the petitioner and her two children as his legal heirs, as evidenced by the Legal Heirship Certificate dated 30.06.2000. Under these circumstances, the petitioner submitted an online application dated 16.03.2026 seeking mutation of the patta in the name of the petitioner and her two children. However, the 2nd respondent passed the impugned non-speaking order without conducting any inquiry or assigning any reasons.
In reply, Mrs. A. Bakkiya Lakshmi, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, fairly conceded that the impugned order was passed without assigning any reasons. She submitted that the impugned order may be set aside and the matter may be remitted back to the 2nd respondent for fresh consideration in accordance with the law.
Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
A perusal of the records reveals that the petitioner had previously filed W.P. No. 9568 of 2026, wherein this Court, by an order dated 10.03.2026, directed the 2nd respondent to pass final orders, on merits and in accordance with law, on the petitioner’s representation dated 13.01.2026, after giving due consideration to the supporting documents and after hearing the objections of all necessary parties. Despite the explicit directions of this Court, the 2nd respondent neither conducted an inquiry nor afforded an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner to put forth her case. The 2nd respondent was duty-bound to pass a reasoned speaking order after complying with the principles of natural justice. In the present case, these mandatory compliance measures were completely discarded, which amounts to a clear violation of the principles of natural justice.
The records further reveal a lethargic attitude on the part of the 2nd respondent while passing the impugned order. Under such circumstances, the impugned non-speaking order dated 21.05.2026 passed by the 2nd respondent is legally unsustainable and is, accordingly, set aside. Consequently, this Court directs the 2nd respondent / Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Arcot Taluk, to consider the petitioner’s application dated 16.03.2026. Since the patta currently stands in the name of the petitioner’s deceased husband and the petitioner, along with her children, is in physical possession of the subject property, this Court finds no legal impediment for the 2nd respondent to mutate the revenue records. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent is directed to mutate the revenue records and issue the patta in the name of the petitioner and her two children within 48 hours from today.
The 2nd respondent / Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, is further directed to appear before this Court in person on 24.09.2026 along with the newly issued patta.
Post the matter on 24.09.2026 "for reporting compliance" and passing further orders.