K.Dhanpal Vs the District Collector

dated 29.08.2025 in Na.Ka.3911/2025/Aa2 issued under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and void and consequently forbear the respondents from in any manner interfering with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the subject property in S.No.197/1, Vellanur Village, Avadi Taluk, Thiruvallur District, except in accordance with law.

¶25

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sankarasubbu For Respondents : Mr.T.K.Saravanan, Additional Government Pleader

¶26

ORDER

¶27

[Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J. ,]

¶28

In the captioned 'Writ Petition' [hereinafter 'WP' for the sake of brevity] a 'notice dated 29.08.2025 bearing reference Na.Ka.3911/2025/Aa2 issued by R2 (Tahsildar, Arikkampedu Village, Vellanur Post, Thiruvallur District)' {hereinafter 'impugned notice' for the sake of convenience and clarity} purportedly under Section 6 of 'The Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (Tamil Nadu Act III of 1905)' {hereinafter 'said 1905 Act' for the sake of brevity} h as been assailed.

¶29

Page Nos.2/12

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.No.34469 of 2025

¶32

Mr.R.Sankarasubbu, learned counsel for writ petitioner submits that the writ petitioner and four others came to this Court earlier by way of writ petition in W.P.No.9573 of 2025 seeking a negative mandamus i.e., forbearing official respondents from dispossessing the petitioner qua Survey No.197/1, Arikkampedu Village, Vallanur Post, Thiruvallur District, this writ petition was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court by an order dated 24.03.2025 to which one of us (M.Sundar, J) was a party. Learned counsel draws our attention to paragraph No.6 which is the operative portion of the order and the same reads as follows:

¶33

'6. In such perspective of the matter, the following order is made:

¶34

i. The competent authority shall issue a show cause notice to the writ petitioners under Section 7 of the LE Act;

¶35

ii. Thereafter, if any representation is made by the writ petitioners, the same shall be considered on its own

¶36

Page Nos.3/12

¶37

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

¶38

W.P.No.34469 of 2025

¶39

merits and in accordance with law before final

¶40

orders are passed under Section 6 of the LE Act;

¶41

iii. In the event of orders adverse to writ petitioners

¶42

being passed, the same shall be assailed by the writ petitioners by taking recourse to filing of statutory appeal under Section 10 of the LE Act before R1 (District Collector), if so advised and if so desired.'

¶43

Learned counsel for writ petitioner submits that pursuant to aforementioned judicial order, a notice under Section 7 of said 1905 Act being notice dated 25.03.2025 bearing reference U.Mu.No.78/2025 was issued and writ petitioner responded to the same vide a detailed representation/response dated 05.04.2025 and a scanned reproduction of the same is as follows:

¶44

Page Nos.4/12

¶45

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

¶46

W.P.No.34469 of 2025

¶47

Page Nos.5/12

¶48

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

¶49

W.P.No.34469 of 2025

¶50

Page Nos.6/12

¶51

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

¶52

W.P.No.34469 of 2025

¶53

Page Nos.7/12

¶54

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

¶55

W.P.No.34469 of 2025

¶56

Page Nos.8/12

¶57

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

¶58

W.P.No.34469 of 2025

¶59

Page Nos.9/12

¶60

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

¶61

W.P.No.34469 of 2025

¶62

Notwithstanding earlier judicial order, impugned notice has been issued purportedly under Section 6 of said 1905 Act, which does not even advert to (much less consider) writ petitioner's aforereferred response dated 05.04.2025.

¶63

Issue notice.

¶64

Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepted notice for all four respondents and in his usual fairness, submitted that the impugned notice issued by R2 is being withdrawn. This submission is recorded and the impugned notice stands effaced. However, learned State counsel requests that R2 may now be permitted to consider the writ petitioner's aforereferred response dated 05.04.2025 and pass orders afresh. This request is acceded to. As regards such de novo drill, all the rights and contentions of the writ petitioner as well as State stand preserved and all questions are left open.

¶65