IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

W.P.No. OF 2019

Venkatesh M/,
Son of Krishnappa,
31/1,Dhyana durgam village,
Shoolagiri, Krishnagiri District,
Krishnagiri-635 117. … Petitioner

-Vs-
1. The District Collector,
Krishnagiri District,
Krishnagiri.

2. The District Revenue Officer,

Krishnagiri District,
Krishnagiri.

3. The Revenue divisional officer,

Schoolagiri taluk,
Krishnagiri district.

4. The Tahsildar,
Shoolagiri Taluk,
Krishnagiri District. …Respondents

AFFIDAVIT OF VEERACHARI

I, Venkatesh , Son of Krishnappa, Hindu, Male, aged about 68 years,

residing at No. 31/1 dhyana durgam village, Shoolagiri, Krishnagiri District,

now temporarily come down to Madras do hereby solemnly affirm and

sincerely state as follows:-

 -2-

1. I state that I am the petitioner herein and as such I am conversant

with

the facts and circumstances of the case.I am filing the present writ petition

seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus or any other writ or order or

direction to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of 2nd

respondent in W.P. No.29423/2017 dated 26.07 .2019 and to quash the

same as illegal, incompetent and ultravires and consequently direct the

respondents to restore the pattas in Patta No.

2. I reverently state that I am the resident of the above mentioned

address. The property at S.No. 32, an extent of 3 acres situated at

Sokkanathapuram village, Hosur taluk, Krishnagiri District, was from the

original possession of Venkataramanappa. Petitioner Krishnappa and

Respondent’s father srikantappa are the sons of Venkatramanappa. After

the demise of late Venkatramanappa property was jointly enjoyed by both

the brothers and they were paying kists to the Government regularly .

3. I also state that the patta for all the said properties stood in the name

of the family members and the legal heirs jointly. The property’s title deeds

of S.No. 32, an extent of 3 acres area originated from No.1850/1943 of

4.05.1943 for my father V.Krishnappa . Also according to Patta No.21 of old

‘A’ registration the title deeds belonged to my father.

4. After the demise of the late V.Krishnappa S/O Venkatramanappa and

with the help of UDR fault survey V.Kantappa alienated the patta of the

property without the consent of Krishnappa’s family and registered patta in

his name. Later he also sold it to property to Lingareddy .L.Ravindrareddy

and Guruvareddy as sale agreement No.498/2003 on 10.02.2003 and a

partition deed (No. 3759/2000 on 30.10.2000) was subsequently made.

Currently L.Thimmareddy S/O of Lingareddy has constructed a house and

maintains a brick factory .

5. All these patta registrations are done only after the implementation of

UDR survey. It is clearly registered in the name of V.Krishnappa in the old

‘A’ registration according to patta No.21 . It is also clear in the agreement

No.1850/1943 that the land upto extent 3 acres belongs to V. Krishnappa. I

also have the document of deed. All the present documents with

Thimmareddy are after the implementation of the UDR survey

GROUNDS

i. That the order passed by the respondent is per se illegal,

incompetent and ultravires.

ii. That the respondent ought to have issued patta immediately in

my favour. Not doing so warrants interference of this Hon’ble

Court.
 iii. That the inaction on the part of the respondent would

deliberately offend Article 14, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution

of India, 1950.

4. I state that this is the first writ petition filed before this Hon’ble Court

and no other case is pending before any other forum as to the same cause of

action.

It is therefore most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be

pleased to issue a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other writ

or order or direction directing the 4threspondent to consider

myrepresentation dated 11.06.2019 and may pass such other or further

orders as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper to the facts and

circumstances of the case and thereby render justice.

Solemnly affirmed at Madras

On this the 26th day of August 2019 BEFORE ME
And the content of the affidavit is explained to
His in and after understanding the same
Signed his name in my presence.

Page No.3& Last, No of Corrns, ADVOCATE:

MADRAS

MEMORANDUM OF WRIT PETITION

(UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

W.P.No. OF 2019

Veerachari M/68,
Son of Ramachari,
Door no. 460. Banglow street,
Uthanapalli, Hosur Taluk,
Udanappalli,
Krishnagiri-635 119. … Petitioner

-Vs-
1. The District Collector,
Krishnagiri District,
Krishnagiri.

2. The District Revenue Officer,

Krishnagiri District,
Krishnagiri.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer,

Hosur,
Krishnagiri District

4. The Tahsildar,
Shoolagiri Taluk,
Krishnagiri District. …Respondents

WRIT PETITION

The petitioner above state as follows:-

The address for service of all notices and processes on the petitioner is

that of his CounselM/s.R.JAYAPRAKASH,R.S.MAITREYA&

G. KEERTHANA, Advocates, having office at No.11, Judge Jambulingam

Street, Dr.Radhakrishnan Road, Mylapore, Chennai –600 004.

-2-

The address for service of all noticesand processes on the respondent

is as stated above.

For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is therefore

most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ
in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction

directing the 4threspondent to consider the petitioner’s representation dated

11.06.2019 and may pass such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court

deem fit and proper to the facts and circumstances of the case and thereby

render justice.

Dated at Madras on this the26thday of August 2019.

Counsel for the Petitioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

W.P.No. OF 2019

Veerachari … Petitioner

-Vs-
The District Collector and 3 others …Respondents

SYNOPSIS

1. The petitioner had purchased the property at S.No. 1164 and Patta

No. 1055, an extent of 0.24 cents situated at

2. From the date of the purchase the petitioner is in peaceful possession

and enjoyment of the same. The petitioner is doing agriculture on the

lands and paying the taxes and kists to the Government promptly.

3. The sitta for the said property stands in the name of another. Hence

the petitioner had sent a representation along with the relevant

documents to the 4threspondent on 16.06.2017 requesting him to issue

sitta in thepetitionerfavour. Even then they are reluctant to consider the

sameHence the present writ petition.

Dated at Madras on this the26thday of August 2019.

Counsel for the Petitioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

W.P.No. OF 2019

Veerachari … Petitioner
 -Vs-

The District Collector and 3 others …Respondents

DATES AND EVENTS

DATES EVENTS

---- From the date of the purchase the petitioner is in

peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same.

---- The Sitta for the said property stands in the name of
Potha Ramappa W/o. Muniyamma.

11.06.2019 The petitioner had sent a representation to the

4threspondent requesting him to issue Sitta in the
petitioner favour.

---- Even then they are reluctant to consider the same.

Hence the present writ petition has been filed.

Dated at Madras on this the 26thday of August 2019.

Counsel for the Petitioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

W.P.No. OF 2019
Veerachari M/68, … Petitioner

-Vs-
The District Collector and 3 others …Respondents

INDEX TO THE TYPED SET OF PAPERS

S.No. Date Description of Documents Page No.

3. 21.08.2019 Encumbrance Certificate

4. 11.06.2019 Representation copy

It is certified that the abovementioned documents are true copies.

Dated at Madras on this the 27thday of August 2019.

Counsel for the Petitioner