Dismissed

Chinnapapa v. The District Collector

Madras HC23 Mar 2023WP/8883/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed three writ petitions filed by petitioners seeking prevention of eviction and direction to issue patta under Article 226. The court held that where proceedings are issued under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act 1908, the petitioners must first avail the statutory appeal under Section 10 of the Act. Consequently, the writ petitions were not maintainable for non-e

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were dismissed for non-exhaustion of statutory remedy; liberty granted to avail the statutory appellate remedy.

Chinnapapa Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

WP Nos.8883, 8885 and 8887 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 23.03.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.T.RAJA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶8

WP Nos.8883, 8885 and 8887 of 2023

¶9

Chinapapa .. Petitioner in WP.No.8883/2023 Chinnasamy .. Petitioner in WP.No.8885/2023 Muniyan .. Petitioner in WP.No.8887/2023

¶10

¶11

The District Collector District Collector Office Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.

¶12

The Thasildar Thasildar Office Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.

¶13

The Revenue Inspector Revenue Inspector Office Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District. .. Respondents

¶14

Prayer: W.P.No.8883 of 2023 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent not to evict the petitioner form the cultivating land and to direct the second respondent to issue patta to the petitioner's land bearing Survey No.381 classified as Government Land admeasuring an extent 0.23.00 hectare approximately 0.57 cent situated at Souttahalli-2, Periyamuthur, Kuttur Village, Krishnagiri Taluk, Krishnagiri, by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 02.02.2023.

¶15

Page 1 of 6

¶16

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

¶17

WP Nos.8883, 8885 and 8887 of 2023

¶18

Prayer: W.P.No.8885 of 2023 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent not to evict the petitioner form the cultivating land and to direct the second respondent to issue patta to the petitioner's land bearing Survey No.381 classified as Government Land admeasuring an extent 0.23.00 hectare approximately 0.57 cent situated at Souttahalli-2, Periyamuthur, Kuttur Village, Krishnagiri Taluk, Krishnagiri, by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 28.01.2023.

¶19

Prayer: W.P.No.8887 of 2023 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent not to evict the petitioner form the cultivating land and to direct the second respondent to issue patta to the petitioner's land bearing Survey No.381 classified as Government Land admeasuring an extent 0.11.50 hectare approximately 0.28 cent situated at Souttahalli-2 Village, Periyamuthur, Goundapanur Village, Krishnagiri Taluk, Krishnagiri, by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 02.02.2023.

¶20

For the Petitioners : Mr.V.Balamurugan For the Respondents : Mr.P.Muthukumar State Government Pleader

¶21

COMMON ORDER

¶22

(Order of the court was made by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice)

¶23

The petitioners have filed these writ petitions seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent not to evict them from the cultivating lands and further direct the second respondent to issue pattas to the petitioners in respect of the land bearing Survey No.381 classified as Government Land (i) admeasuring an extent 0.23.00 hectare approximately 0.57 cent situated at Souttahalli-2, Periyamuthur, Kuttur Village, Krishnagiri Taluk,

¶24

Page 2 of 6

¶25

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

¶26

WP Nos.8883, 8885 and 8887 of 2023

¶27

Krishnagiri, by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 02.02.2023 [in W.P.No.8883 of 2023]; admeasuring an extent 0.23.00 hectare approximately 0.57 cent situated at Souttahalli-2, Periyamuthur, Kuttur Village, Krishnagiri Taluk, Krishnagiri, by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 28.01.2023 [in W.P.No.8885 of 2023]; admeasuring an extent 0.11.50 hectare approximately 0.28 cent situated at Souttahalli-2 Village, Periyamuthur, Goundapanur Village, Krishnagiri Taluk, Krishnagiri, by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 02.02.2023 [in WP No.8887 of 2023].

¶28

Mr.V.Balamurugan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, would submit that the petitioners and their ancestors are cultivating the lands in question for more than 100 years and are paying appropriate tax to the government. While so, the third respondent issued proceedings under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act 1908 requiring the petitioners to vacate from the lands in question. Therefore, the petitioners have been advised to file these writ petitions.

¶29

If the petitioners are aggrieved by the proceedings issued under Section 6 of the Act, the remedy by way of a statutory appeal lies before the first respondent/District Collector under Section 10 of the Act. Without exhausting such appellate remedy available, the present writ petitions are not maintainable.

¶30

Page 3 of 6

¶31

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

¶32

WP Nos.8883, 8885 and 8887 of 2023

¶33

For the foregoing reason, these writ petitions are dismissed. However,

¶34

liberty is given to the petitioners to avail the statutory appellate remedy available to them. There will be no order as to costs.

¶35

(T.R., ACJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 23.03.2023 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No tar

¶36

Page 4 of 6

¶37

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

¶38

WP Nos.8883, 8885 and 8887 of 2023

¶39

¶40

The District Collector District Collector Office Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.

¶41

The Thasildar Thasildar Office Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.

¶42

The Revenue Inspector Revenue Inspector Office Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.

¶43

Page 5 of 6

¶44

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

¶45

WP Nos.8883, 8885 and 8887 of 2023

¶46

T.RAJA, ACJ, and D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

¶47

(tar)

¶48

WP Nos.8883, 8885 and 8887 of 2023

¶49

23.03.2023

¶50

Page 6 of 6

¶51

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

Chinnapapa v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinnapapa v. The District Collector

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

R.Gopal Vs District Collector and commissioner (Excise)

K.S.Manoj Vs Union of India

N.Prabakaran Vs The Commissioner

Jayaraman.T.M. Vs The National Commission for Scheduled Castes

C.Sivakumar Vs The District Collector

G.Sadayaraj, Vs Shri.v.Balakrishnan