Disposed

K.Elumalai v. The District Colelctor

Madras HC7 Sept 2023WP/8244/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged alleged encroachment on Government poramboke land by the sixth respondent via forged documents, seeking cancellation of the survey number. The High Court held that the District Revenue Officer must conduct a full enquiry affording a hearing to all parties before deciding the merits.

What did the court decide?

Directs the District Revenue Officer to conduct an enquiry, afford an opportunity of hearing to all parties, and pass orders on merits regarding removal of encroachment if found.

K.Elumalai Vs The District Colelctor — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.8244 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 07.09.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶6

W.P.No.8244 of 2019

K.Elumalai

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶11

2.The District Revenue Officer, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶12

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶13

4.The Tahsildar, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶14

5.The Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai Taluk Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.

6.J.Mohanraj Naidu

...Respondents

Page 1 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

W.P.No.8244 of 2019

¶20

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 herein to pass an appropriate order on the petitioner's representation dated 27.02.2019 by way of cancelling the Sub Division Survey No.108/12A1B obtained from the Government poramboke land by the 6 th respondent through forged documents and direct the respondents 1 to 4 herein to take action as against the 6 th respondent, who are all prevented his family to use common pathway situated in the Government poramboke land bearing S.No.108 of Samudram Village, Tiruvannamalai Taluk and District.

¶21

F or Petitioner : Mr.G.Mohan for Mr.A.Prakash For R1 to R4 : Mr.T.Arunkumar Additional Government Pleader For R5 : No appearance For R6 : Mr.B.Jawahar

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 27.02.2019 by way of cancelling the Sub Division Survey No.108/12A1B obtained from the Government poramboke land by the 6 th respondent

¶24

Page 2 of 6

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

W.P.No.8244 of 2019

¶27

through forged documents and direct the respondents 1 to 4 herein to take action as against the 6 th respondent, who are all prevented his family to use common pathway situated in the Government poramboke land bearing S.No.108 of Samudram Village, Tiruvannamalai Taluk and District.

¶28

2.The petitioner submitted a representation stating that the 6th respondent has encroached upon the Government poromboke land which has been utilized as pathway by the people of that locality including the petitioner. Since the 6th respondent put up some structures, the petitioner made a representation to remove the encroachments.

¶29

3.The learned counsel for the 6th respondent made a submission that the 6^th respondent was issued with a patta and therefore, it is a patta land and the petitioner has given a complaint without verifying the facts with reference to the documents and revenue records.

¶30

4.May that as it be. The respondents have to conduct an enquiry and decide the issues on merits and in accordance with law. Accordingly, the

¶31

Page 3 of 6

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

W.P.No.8244 of 2019

¶34

second respondent, District Revenue Officer, Tiruvannamalai is directed to conduct an enquiry with reference to the documents and revenue records and by affording an opportunity to all the parties including the petitioner and the 6^th respondent and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law. If it is found that the 6th respondent has encroached upon the Government poromboke land, such encroachments are to be removed by following the procedures as contemplated under law.

¶35

5.With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶36

07.09.2023

¶37

cse Index:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order

¶38

Page 4 of 6

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

W.P.No.8244 of 2019

¶41

¶42

1.The District Collector, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶43

2.The District Revenue Officer, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶44

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶45

4.The Tahsildar, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶46

5.The Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai Taluk Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶47

Page 5 of 6

¶48

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶49

W.P.No.8244 of 2019

¶50

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

¶51

cse

¶52

W.P.No.8244 of 2019

¶53

07.09.2023

¶54

Page 6 of 6

¶55

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

K.Elumalai v. The District Colelctor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Elumalai v. The District Colelctor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.Vaithiyalingam Vs The District Collector

Govindan Vs the District Collector

R.Gengusamy Vs The State of Tamil nadu

G.C.Sivaraj Vs District Revenue Officer

T.Srinivasan @ Mani Vs the District collector

Tridem Port and Power Company Vs State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by