R THANGAVELU Vs. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 and 3 to survey the petitioner's properties in Town Survey No.63, with an extent of 0.0.540 sq.meter; in Town Survey No.65, with an extent of 0.1830.0 sq.meter; in Town Survey No.89, with an extent of 0.0084.0 sq.meter and in Town Survey No.90, with an extent of 0.0717.0 sq.meter situated at Ponmeni, Bye Pass Road, Madurai and consequently direct the 2nd and 4th respondents to provide adequate police protection for the same based on the petitioner's representation dated 11.07.2017.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 and the learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent. There is no representation on behalf of the sixth respondent.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the property comprising in Sy.No.66/5, measuring about 2.22 acres originally belonged to the petitioner's grandmother, Theivanaiyammal. She purchased the said property on 10.07.1931. Subsequently, 0.74 acre was acquired for the purpose of laying By-pass road. The said Theivanaiyammal died on 16.08.1974. Thereafter, the legal heirs of the said Theivanaiyammal executed a sale deed to the third parties. In the meanwhile, patta for the extent of 25 cents was wrongly transferred to some other persons. He further submitted that the first respondent in his order, dated 31.12.2015, directed the third respondent to issue a joint patta in favour of the said Theivanaiyammal for the properties situated in Town Survey No.63, measuring 0.0.540 sq.meter; in Town Survey No.65, with an extent of 0.1830.0 sq.meter; in Town Survey No.89, with an extent of 0.0084.0 sq.meter and in Town Survey No.90, with an extent of 0.0717.0 sq.meter. Thereafter, the name of the said Theivanaiyammal was included in the joint patta for the aforesaid survey numbers for the extent of 25 cents. He further submitted that the petitioner is not able to measure the aforesaid properties because of the threat of the respondents 5 and 6 and hence, the petitioner has made an application for survey of his lands on 07.04.2017. But the third respondent informed the petitioner to obtain necessary police protection. He further submitted that the petitioner has submitted an application before the second respondent on 11.07.2017, seeking police protection, but, sofar, no order has been passed and hence, he requests to direct the 2nd and 4th respondents to provide necessary police protection for measuring the petitioner's land and also direct the respondents 1 & 3 to survey the petitioner's land.