Allowed

Viyakula Arpudha Latha v. The Tahsildar

Madras HC1 Mar 2023WP(MD)/3826/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble Madurai Bench of Madras High Court heard a Writ Petition filed under Article 226 directing the survey authorities to survey and demarcate land. The Court issued specific directions including issuing notices, holding an enquiry, and completing the survey within six weeks with police protection.

What did the court decide?

Directed the survey authority to issue notices, hold an enquiry, and complete the survey and demarcation within six weeks with police protection if required.

Viyakula Arpudha Latha Vs The Tahsildar — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.3826 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 01.03.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.3826 of 2023

¶7

Vijakula Arpudha Latha ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Tahsildar, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶10

2.The Head Surveyor, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to survey, demarcate and record the boundaries of the property in Survey No. 1268/1A (measuring to an extent of 2 acres and 90.38 cents), Perungudi Village, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District by considering the application dated 06.07.2022 and the payment of Rs.2,000/- that has been made through Challan No.20220706004752, dated 06.07.2022 as expeditiously as possible within a time stipulation as prescribed by this Court.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Anand

¶13

For Respondents : Mr.M.Lingadurai Special Government Pleader

¶14

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

¶15

1/4

¶16

W.P(MD)No.3826 of 2023

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner has applied to the jurisdictional authority for conducting survey of the petition mentioned lands and for demarcation of the boundaries. Since the authority had not acted upon the petitioner's request, this writ petition came to be filed. The petitioner's counsel asserts that the application given by the petitioner for conducting survey is in order.

¶19

The Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶20

(I) The survey authority will issue notice to the writ petitioner as well as the adjacent land owners and also to the interested persons, if any.

¶21

(II) Enquiry shall be held. During enquiry, objections raised by

¶22

the adjacent land owners / interested persons shall be considered.

¶23

(III) If according to the jurisdictional authority, the objections

¶24

are without any basis, the same shall be overruled and the objectors shall be informed accordingly. But the survey will be conducted only after a period of six weeks so that the objector can move the concerned Court for injunction. If before the proposed date of survey, the

¶25

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

¶26

2/4

¶27

W.P(MD)No.3826 of 2023

¶28

objector is unable to obtain any injunction order, the survey can very well go on. It is open to the parties to serve memo of instructions to

¶29

the surveyor at the time of conducting the survey. The same will be borne in mind. While it cannot be binding on the surveyor, the same will be taken note of.

¶30

(IV) If the jurisdictional authority finds objections to be having substance, then, he shall call upon the applicant to move the jurisdictional civil Court for agitating his rights.

¶31

(V) If required, the survey authority is empowered to seek aid of the jurisdictional police and the jurisdictional police are mandated to grant police protection.

¶32

(VI) It is made clear that at the end of the survey exercise, survey stones alone can be installed. The exercise of survey and demarcation undertaken pursuant to the direction of this Court can never result in dispossession of any party. No person shall put up fencing at the time of survey by using police aid. The Survey Authority will pass order within a period of six weeks after service of notice on the interested persons.

¶33

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

¶34

3/4

¶35

W.P(MD)No.3826 of 2023

¶36

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶37

rmi

¶38

(VII) A copy of the survey report will be served on the parties

also.

No costs.

01.03.2023

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No rmi

¶43

To 1.The Tahsildar, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶44

2.The Head Surveyor, Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶45

W.P(MD)No.3826 of 2023

¶46

01.03.2023

¶47

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

¶48

4/4

Viyakula Arpudha Latha v. The Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Viyakula Arpudha Latha v. The Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Masilamani Vs The Director

Lakshmanan Suppiramaniyan Vs The Regional Passport Officer

Meenakshi Sundaram.K.R Vs The District Registrar

Baluchamy.P Vs The Tahsildar

Selvaraj Vs The Tahsildar

K.Kavitha, Vs S.Krishnasamy