Disposed

Jeyachandran L v. The District Collector

Madras HC25 Apr 2023WP(MD)/9905/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a direction to remove encroachment on a common pathway in Survey No.50/3B, Parivillikottai. The High Court dispensed with notice to the private respondent and, taking the matter up at the admission stage, directed the Fourth Respondent (Tahsildar) to remove the encroachment within four weeks via due process.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Fourth Respondent (Tahsildar) to remove the encroachment within four weeks of the order date after following due process.

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

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.9905 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 25.04.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

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

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.9905 of 2023

¶7

L.Jeyachandran ... Petitioner

¶8

-vs-

¶9

1.The District Collector Thoothukudi District Thoothukudi

¶10

2.The District Revenue Officer Thoothukudi District

¶11

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer Ottapidaram Thoothukudi District

¶12

4.The Tashildhar Ottapidaram Taluk Thoothukudi District

¶13

5.The Block Development Officer Ottapidaram Thoothukudi District

¶14

6.Chandrasekaran ... Respondents

¶15

____________ Page 1 of 6

¶16

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

¶17

PRAYER:

¶18

W.P.(MD) No.9905 of 2023

¶19

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 5 to remove the encroachments made by the sixth respondent in the common pathway situated in Survey No.50/3B, Parivillikottai, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District, in accordance with the eviction notice issued by the fourth resondent in Na.Ka.No.A3/09/2022, dated 28.10.2022, within a time stipulated by this Court.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Dinesh For Respondents : Mr.S.P.Maharajan Special Government Pleader for R1 to R5

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

[Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE]

¶23

Mr.S.P.Maharajan, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents 1 to 5.

¶24

2. Considering the nature of the relief, notice to the private respondent is dispensed with.

¶25

Page 2 of 6

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.(MD) No.9905 of 2023

¶28

3. With the consent of both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself.

¶29

4. L.Jeyachandran, son of Lakshmanan, has filed this writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 5 to remove the encroachment made by the sixth respondent in the common pathway in Survey No.50/3B of Parivillikottai Village, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District.

¶30

5. In support of the prayer sought for, the petitioner has also produced a notice, dated 28.10.2023, appears to have been issued under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for brevity, “the Act”), by the Tahsildar, Ottapidaram Taluk, which shows that the land in Survey No.50/3B of Parivillikottai Village, to an extent of Hectare 0.01.0 Ares, is classified as “epytpay; ghij” and the nature of encroachment is Garden.

¶31

6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that though the said notice was issued to the sixth respondent as early as on 28.10.2022, no action was taken till date by the Tahsildar to remove the encroachment. Therefore, the petitioner has come up with this writ petition.

¶32

____________ Page 3 of 6

¶33

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

¶34

W.P.(MD) No.9905 of 2023

¶35

7. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 5 submitted that there is no notice issued under Section 7 of the Act, however, since the Thasildar has issued the notice dated 28.10.2022, he has to proceed further for removal of encroachment.

¶36

8. We also find that the sixth respondent prima facie appears to have encroached the land in question, which is classified as “epytpay; ghij” as Garden. Therefore, the fourth respondent is hereby directed to remove the encroachment made by the sixth respondent, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving due notice to all the parties concerned and by following due process of law.

¶37

9. The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No

¶38

costs.

¶39

[T.R., A.C.J.] [R.S.M., J.] 25.04.2023

¶40

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No

¶41

krk

¶42

____________ Page 4 of 6

¶43

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

¶44

W.P.(MD) No.9905 of 2023

¶45

To:

¶46

1.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

¶47

2.The District Revenue Officer, Thoothukudi District.

¶48

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ottapidaram, Thoothukudi District.

¶49

4.The Tashildhar, Ottapidaram Taluk, Thoothukudi District.

¶50

5.The Block Development Officer, Ottapidaram, Thoothukudi District.

¶51

Page 5 of 6

¶52

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

¶53

W.P.(MD) No.9905 of 2023

¶54

T.RAJA, A.C.J. and R.SUBRAMANIAN , J.

¶55

krk

¶56

W.P.(MD) No.9905 of 2023

¶57

25.04.2023

¶58

____________ Page 6 of 6

¶59

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

Jeyachandran L v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeyachandran L 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

Gnanaselva Pappa Vs the Commissioner

Balamurugan Vs S.Aneesh Sekhar

The State of Tamil Nadu, Vs S. Sujatha