Writ petition challenged an eviction notice issued under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act for occupation of grama natham land. The court held mere occupation confers no title and revenue authorities may evict per procedure under the Act; petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(MD)No.101 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 04.06.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE
W.P.(MD)No.101 of 2025 and
W.M.P.(MD)No.90 & 91 of 2025
Arumugam
... Petitioner
Vs.
1/5
W.P.(MD)No.101 of 2025
...Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order dated 12.12.2024 passed by the 3rd respondent and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian For R1 to R4 : Mr.J.Ashok Additional Government Pleader For R5 : Mr.K.Arun Raj For R6 : No appearance
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. )
The notice issued under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 is under challenge in this Writ Petition.
2.Admittedly, the petitioner is in occupation of the grama natham land.
Grama natham lands are to be allotted only to landless poor people based on the 2/5
W.P.(MD)No.101 of 2025
eligibility criteria as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Revenue Standing Order (RSO) 21. Thus, mere occupation would not confer any right, title or ownership of grama natham land. The issue regarding grama natham lands and power of the Government to regulate grama natham lands in terms of RSO 21 have been elaborately considered and legal principles are settled by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Tahsildar, Sankarapuram, Kallakurichi District vs. T.Elumalai and others in W.A.No.1014 of 2025, dated 03.06.2025.
3.In view of the fact that the petitioner is an encroacher and not assigned with grama natham land by the revenue authorities in terms of RSO 21, the revenue authorities are empowered to evict the encroacher by following the procedures as contemplated under the provisions of the Act. Thus, this Court do not find any irregularity or infirmity in respect of the impugned order and therefore, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
(S.M.S., J.) & (A.D.M.C., J.) 04.06.2025
NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Yuva 3/5
W.P.(MD)No.101 of 2025
To:-
4/5
W.P.(MD)No.101 of 2025
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
DR.A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.
Yuva
W.P.(MD)No.101 of 2025
04.06.2025
5/5
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the notice under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act against a grama natham encroacher was sustainable.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Tahsildar, Sankarapuram, Kallakurichi District vs. T.Elumalai and othersRelied on¶2
W.A.No.1014 of 2025, dated 03.06.2025
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Arumugam
The District Collector, Pudukkottai District
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Illupur Post and Taluk, Pudukkottai District
The Tahsildar, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukkottai District
The Block Development Officer, Kunandarkovil Panchayat Union, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukkottai District
The President, Kulathur Village Panchayat, Kulathur Post and Taluk, Pudukkottai District
S.M.Subramaniam
A.D.Maria Clete
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
