Disposed¶31

A.Vasanthi v. The District Collector / Monitoring Committee

Madras HC24 Jun 2025WP(MD)/17091/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench; W.P.(MD)No.17091 of 2025; eviction; encroachment; water body; Natham Land; patta; due process; mandamus; Article 226; alternative site; landless poor; District Collector Pudukkottai; Tahsildar Ponnamaravathi; Block Development Officer; Kandiyanatham Village; affidavit undertaking; disposed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with no costs: respondents permitted to proceed with eviction strictly according to due process, with opportunity of hearing to the petitioner; landless petitioner free to seek alternative site/allotment from the District Collector upon furnishing an affidavit undertaking to remove the encroachment, with sufficient time to shift. ¶31

A.Vasanthi Vs The District Collector / Monitoring… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents can be restrained from evicting the petitioner from the southern portion of land in S.F.No.624, Kandiyanatham Village, otherwise than by due process of law. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

The respondents are permitted to take the eviction process to its logical conclusion, subject to strict adherence to due process of law.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner shall be provided an opportunity to put forth her case; if the respondent finds her to be in occupation of a water body, she has to be necessarily evicted.

¶29

Key takeaways

As a landless poor person, the petitioner may apply to the District Collector, Pudukkottai; if found eligible, the first respondent will consider allotting her an alternative site or accommodation.ratio¶30
The petitioner must file an affidavit undertaking to remove the encroachment if the respondents find her to be an encroacher, and she is to be given sufficient breathing time to shift to an alternative site.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 - petitioner in occupation of portion of S.F.No.624, Kandiyanatham Village, prima facie a water body - sought restraint on eviction except by due process and reclassification as Natham Land with patta pursuant to representation dated 03.02.2025 - Held: respondents permitted to take eviction process to its logical conclusion subject to strict adherence to due process; petitioner to be heard; if found in occupation of water body, eviction is necessary; landless poor petitioner may apply to District Collector, Pudukkottai for alternative site or accommodation upon filing affidavit undertaking to remove encroachment, with sufficient breathing time to shift - Writ petition disposed of, no costs.

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.17091 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 24.06.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

W.P(MD)No.17091 of 2025

A.Vasanthi

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector / Monitoring Committee, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

¶11

2.The Tahsildar, Ponnamaravathi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶12

3.The Block Development Officer, Ponnamaravathi Panchayat Union, Ponnamaravathi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 3 not to evict the petitioner from the southern portion of land in S.F.No.624 situated at Kandiyanatham Village, Thoothur Taluk, Pudukkottai District without following due process of law and consequently, direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 03.02.2025 to reclassify the southern portion of S.F.No.

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.17091 of 2025

¶18

624 situated at Kandiyanatham Village, Thoothur Taluk, Pudukkottai District as Natham Land and grant patta to the petitioner within a time stipulated by this Court.

¶19

For Petitioner :Mr.A.Arul Jenifer

¶20

For Respondents :Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar Special Government Pleader for R1 & R2 : Mr.Shaji Bino for R3

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Heard both sides.

¶23

Prima facie, it appears that the petitioner is in occupation of a

¶24

portion of a water body. In order to stave of the eviction proceedings at the hands of the respondents, the present writ petition has been filed for forbearing the respondents from evicting her except by due process of law.

¶25

The learned Special Government Pleader informs the Court that already notice has been issued.

¶26

2/4

¶27

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

¶28

W.P.(MD)No.17091 of 2025

¶29

We permit the respondents to take the process to its logical conclusion. The respondents strictly adhere to the due process of law. Opportunity shall be provided to the petitioner to putforth her case. If the respondent finds the petitioner to be in occupation of a water body, she has to be necessarily evicted.

¶30

The petitioner's counsel states that the petitioner is a landless poor person. If that be so, the petitioner can very well make an application before the District Collector, Pudukkottai. If the petitioner is eligible, the first respondent will consider allotting her an alternative site or accommodation. The petitioner of-course has to file an affidavit undertaking to remove the encroachment in the event the respondents find her to be an encroacher. The petitioner also has to be given sufficient breathing time to shift to an alternative site.

¶31