V. THANGAVEL Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VIRUDHUNAGAR, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition has been filed challenging the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, dated 14.09.2013 on the ground that the writ petitioner 's representation has been considered.

(2.) FIRST of all, the petitioner had asked time for filing counter to the petitioner filed by the sixth respondent before the Revenue Divisional Officer, on 13.09.2014, but without granting time, straight away the impugned order has been passed on 14.09.2013 by the Revenue Divisional Officer. The first hearing was only on 12.09.2013. Further main ground of attack was that the Revenue Divisional Officer has gone in detail regarding the title of the property, when there is a civil suit is pending in O.S.No.144 of 2013 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sivakasi.

(3.) THE Learned counsel appearing for the sixth respondent mainly would contend that the sixth respondent was given opportunity originally by virtue of two hearing dates. The first date was fixed on 12.09.2013 and it was adjourned to 13.09.2014 and thereafter only, on 14.09.2013 the impugned order has been passed. It is also admitted by the sixth respondent that the civil suit in O.S.No.144 of 2013 is filed by him and the petitioner is the defendant.