Dismissed¶47

Nehru v. The District Collector

Madras HC25 Aug 2025WP(MD)/23028/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tenkasi; Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 - Sections 6, 7 and 10; grama natham; land assignment; patta; cattle shed; encroachment eviction; Survey No. 198/7; District Collector appellate order Na.Ka.COLR/10522/2024-H1 dated 03.05.2025; writ of certiorari; Article 226; reasonable opportunity/natural justice in statutory enquiry; writ dismissed, no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed. Bench: S.M. Subramaniam and G. Arul Murugan, JJ.; order by G. Arul Murugan, J.; decision dated 25.08.2025; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; W.P.(MD) No.23028 of 2025; W.M.P.(MD) Nos.18099 & 18100 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

The District Collector passed the impugned order after conducting a proper enquiry and affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, and the petitioner is not able to make out any legal infirmity in the impugned order.

Nehru Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶47

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order of the District Collector dated 03.05.2025 (Na.Ka.COLR/10522/2024-H1), rejecting the petitioner's appeal under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and confirming the Section 6 final notice, is unsustainable and liable to be quashed by writ of certiorari. +2 more

¶28

Court's answer

¶41

Ratio / Principle

Once lands are identified as encroached by the petitioner and appropriate proceedings have been initiated under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, the petitioner is liable to be evicted and the Government lands are to be made encroachment free.

¶41

Key takeaways

In view of the detailed proceedings undertaken, the Court found no illegality in the impugned order passed by the first respondent, found no merit in the writ petition, and dismissed it.ratio¶42

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India (writ of certiorari), Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; order of the Court made by G. Arul Murugan, J. The petitioner (Nehru) challenged the order dated 03.05.2025 (Ref. Na.Ka.COLR/10522/2024-H1) of the District Collector, Tenkasi (first respondent), which rejected his appeal under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and confirmed the final notice issued under Section 6 of that Act for removal of encroachment from Government land in Survey No. 198/7. The petitioner claimed assigned grama natham land with a cattle shed constructed thereon and entitlement to patta. Following earlier directions of this Court in a writ petition by the fifth respondent (Muthukumar), a survey identified encroachments; a Section 7 notice was issued and, after considering replies, a Section 6 final notice issued. The Collector, after detailed enquiry and recording statements of the petitioner and revenue authorities, concluded the petitioner had no right over the Government land and rejected the appeal. Held: the enquiry was proper with reasonable opportunity afforded; the petitioner could make out no legal infirmity; once land is identified as encroached and statutory proceedings initiated, the encroacher is liable to be evicted and Government land must be made encroachment free; no illegality was found in the impugned order. The writ petition was dismissed with no costs and the connected W.M.P.(MD) Nos. 18099 & 18100 of 2025 were closed.

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.23028 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 25.08.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.23028 of 2025 and

¶7

W.M.P.(MD) Nos.18099 & 18100 of 2025

¶8

Nehru ... Petitioner

¶9

-vs-

¶10

1.The District Collector Tenkasi Tenkasi District

¶11

2.The Thasildar Thiruvengadm Taluk Tenkasi, Tenkasi District

¶12

3.The Zonal Deputy Thasildar Thiruvengadam Tenkasi District

¶13

4.The Village Administrative Officer Sathirappatti Tenkasi District

¶14

5.Muthukumar ... Respondents

¶15

_____________ Page 1 of 7_

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.(MD) No.23028 of 2025

¶18

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorari to call for records pertain to the impugned order passed by the 1^st respondent through his proceeding vide Na.Ka.COLR/10522/2024-H1 dated 03.05.2025 and quash the same as illegal.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.Akhilesh Sudhakar for Mr.T.Indrachithu

¶20

For Respondents : Mr.J.Ashok Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R4

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

[Order of the Court was made by G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.]

¶23

This writ petition is filed challenging the order of the District Collector / first respondent dated 03.05.2025, passed in the appeal filed by the writ petitioner under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905.

¶24

2. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was assigned with certain lands and he is in the possession of the same. According to the petitioner, it is a grama natham land and he has constructed a cattle shed in a portion thereof and therefore, he is entitled for

¶25

Page 2 of 7

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.(MD) No.23028 of 2025

¶28

the patta and hence, the same cannot be constructed as an encroachment. The District Collector / first respondent, who had considered the appeal under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, has not gone into the entire aspect of the matter and therefore, the impugned order rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner, is unsustainable.

¶29

3. Per contra, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 submitted that pursuant to the earlier directions issued by this Court in the writ petition filed by the fifth respondent herein, proceedings were undertaken and a survey was conducted and pursuant to the said survey, encroachments were identified and notice under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, was issued and after affording an opportunity and receiving reply, a final notice under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, came to be issued for removing the encroachment. Assailing the said notice, an appeal came to be filed by the petitioner before the District Collector / first respondent, under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act and the District Collector / first respondent by conducting a detailed enquiry and by affording an opportunity to all the parties concerned, rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner.

¶30

Page 3 of 7

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.(MD) No.23028 of 2025

¶33

Therefore, the present writ petition is not maintainable.

¶34

4. Heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record.

¶35

5. An inspection was conducted by the revenue authorities and it was ascertained that there was an encroachment in the lands in Survey No. 198/7. After the encroachments having been identified, a notice under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, was issued and an opportunity was afforded to all the encroachers. Pursuant to the reply submitted, the same was considered, and a final notice under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, was issued, calling upon the petitioner to remove the encroachment.

¶36

6. Assailing the said final notice, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, before the District Collector / first respondent herein.

¶37

7. The District Collector / first respondent conducted a detailed

¶38

_____________ Page 4 of 7_

¶39

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

¶40

W.P.(MD) No.23028 of 2025

¶41

enquiry by affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and all the parties concerned. The statement of the petitioner and also the revenue authorities have been recorded. The District Collector, on coming to the conclusion that the petitioner does not have any right in respect of the land identified, which belongs to the Government and on concluding that the petitioner is in encroachment of the land, confirmed the final notice issued under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. The District Collector / first respondent has passed the impugned order after conducting a proper enquiry and affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. The petitioner is not able to make out any legal infirmity in the impugned order. Once the lands are identified to be encroached by the petitioner and appropriate proceedings has been initiated under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, the petitioner is liable to be evicted and the lands belong to the Government are to be made encroachment free.

¶42

8. In view of the detailed proceedings undertaken, we do not find any illegality in the impugned order passed by the first respondent.

¶43