Dismissed¶117

A.Natarajan v. The District Collector

Madras HC17 Dec 2025WP(MD)/36047/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench; writ petitions dismissed; encroachment removal; Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act 1905 - Section 6 (removal direction) and Section 7 (show-cause notice); certiorarified mandamus under Article 226; natural justice - adequacy of opportunity/personal hearing; impugned order Na.Ka.P3/7374/2024 dated 03.11.2025 by Thasildar, Kadaladi Taluk; Survey No.607/12, Aapanoor Group; Ramanathapuram District; origin in W.P.(MD) No.4198 of 2025 (K.Parvathy) and order dated 18.03.2025; no merit; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

What did the court decide?

On perusing the records, the Court found that the impugned orders were passed by the third respondent only after affording an opportunity to the petitioners, and therefore there is no merit in the writ petitions. ¶113

A.Natarajan Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶117

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned orders dated 03.11.2025 passed by the third respondent under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, directing removal of encroachments, were vitiated because adequate opportunity was not given to the petitioners before their passing. +1 more

¶97

Court's answer

¶113

Ratio / Principle

The action to remove the encroachments emanated from this Court's order dated 18.03.2025 in W.P.(MD) No.4198 of 2025, and after causing notices under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 giving the petitioners opportunity to show cause, the impugned orders under Section 6 were passed.

¶106

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Batch of seven writ petitions (W.P.(MD) Nos.36047 to 36053 of 2025) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the common impugned order in Na.Ka.P3/7374/2024 dated 03.11.2025 passed by the Thasildar, Kadaladi Taluk (third respondent) under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, directing removal of encroachments in Survey No.607/12, Aapanoor Group. Petitioners contended that adequate opportunity was not given before passing the impugned orders, despite the direction in the order dated 18.03.2025 in W.P.(MD) No.4198 of 2025 (filed by K.Parvathy) to afford personal hearing to the aggrieved persons. Held, on perusal of the records, that the action emanated from the order dated 18.03.2025 in W.P.(MD) No.4198 of 2025 and that, after notices under Section 7 of the Act giving opportunity to show cause, the impugned Section 6 orders were passed only after affording opportunity to the petitioners; the writ petitions were accordingly dismissed with no costs and connected miscellaneous petitions closed. The learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that if K.Parvathy is also an encroacher, she will also be issued notice and necessary steps taken against her.

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 17.12.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶6

W.P.(MD) Nos.36047, 36048, 36049, 36050, 36051, 36052 & 36053 of 2025

¶7

and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.28647, 28650, 28652, 28646, 28648, 28651, 28693, 28694, 28695, 28661, 28662, 28664, 28656, 28657, 28658, 28653, 28654, 28655, 28699, 28700 & 28701 of 2025

¶8

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025:

¶9

A.Natarajan ... Petitioner

¶10

-vs-

¶11

1.The District Collector Ramanathapuram District Ramanathapuram-623 503

¶12

2.The Sub Collector Office of the Sub Collector Madurai Main Road Mani Nagar Paramakudi-623 707

¶13

3.The Thasildar Kadaladi Taluk Kadaladi Ramanathapuram District-623 703 ... Respondents

¶14

________________ Page 1 of 14_

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶17

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the third respondent in Na.Ka.P3/7374/2024, dated 03.11.2025 and quash the same as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently directing the respondents to not to disturb the peaceful, passive residence and survival of the petitioner in Survey No.607/12, Aapanoor Group.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Shanmuga Raja For Respondents : Mr.D.Sasi Kumar Additional Government Pleader

¶19

W.P.(MD) No.36048 of 2025:

¶20

A.Murugesan ... Petitioner

¶21

-vs-

¶22

1.The District Collector Ramanathapuram District Ramanathapuram-623 503

¶23

2.The Sub Collector Office of the Sub Collector Madurai Main Road Mani Nagar Paramakudi-623 707

¶24

Page 2 of 14

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶27

3.The Thasildar Kadaladi Taluk Kadaladi Ramanathapuram District-623 703 ... Respondents

¶28

¶29

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Shanmuga Raja For Respondents : Mr.D.Sasi Kumar Additional Government Pleader

¶30

W.P.(MD) No.36049 of 2025:

¶31

A.Rathnavelu ... Petitioner

¶32

-vs-

¶33

1.The District Collector Ramanathapuram District Ramanathapuram-623 503

¶34

________________ Page 3 of 14_

¶35

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

¶36

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶37

2.The Sub Collector Office of the Sub Collector Madurai Main Road Mani Nagar Paramakudi-623 707

¶38

3.The Thasildar Kadaladi Taluk Kadaladi Ramanathapuram District-623 703 ... Respondents

¶39

¶40

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Shanmuga Raja For Respondents : Mr.D.Sasi Kumar Additional Government Pleader

¶41

W.P.(MD) No.36050 of 2025:

A.Muruganathan

... Petitioner

-vs-

________________ Page 4 of 14_

¶46

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

¶47

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶48

1.The District Collector Ramanathapuram District Ramanathapuram-623 503

¶49

2.The Sub Collector Office of the Sub Collector Madurai Main Road Mani Nagar Paramakudi-623 707

¶50

3.The Thasildar Kadaladi Taluk Kadaladi Ramanathapuram District-623 703 ... Respondents

¶51

¶52

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Shanmuga Raja For Respondents : Mr.D.Sasi Kumar Additional Government Pleader

¶53

________________ Page 5 of 14_

¶54

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

¶55

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶56

W.P.(MD) No.36051 of 2025:

¶57

T.Navaneetha Krishnan

¶58

... Petitioner

¶59

-vs-

¶60

1.The District Collector Ramanathapuram District Ramanathapuram-623 503

¶61

2.The Sub Collector Office of the Sub Collector Madurai Main Road Mani Nagar Paramakudi-623 707

¶62

3.The Thasildar Kadaladi Taluk Kadaladi Ramanathapuram District-623 703 ... Respondents

¶63

¶64

________________ Page 6 of 14_

¶65

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

¶66

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶67

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Shanmuga Raja For Respondents : Mr.D.Sasi Kumar Additional Government Pleader

¶68

W.P.(MD) No.36052 of 2025:

¶69

A.Jaihindnathan ... Petitioner

¶70

-vs-

¶71

1.The District Collector Ramanathapuram District Ramanathapuram-623 503 2.The Sub Collector Office of the Sub Collector Madurai Main Road Mani Nagar Paramakudi-623 707 3.The Thasildar Kadaladi Taluk Kadaladi Ramanathapuram District-623 703 ... Respondents

¶72

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue

¶73

a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the third respondent in Na.Ka.P3/7374/2024, dated 03.11.2025 and quash the same as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently directing the respondents to not to disturb the peaceful, passive

¶74

________________ Page 7 of 14_

¶75

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

¶76

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶77

residence and survival of the petitioner in Survey No.607/12, Aapanoor Group.

¶78

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Shanmuga Raja For Respondents : Mr.D.Sasi Kumar Additional Government Pleader

¶79

W.P.(MD) No.36053 of 2025:

¶80

L.Panjavarnam ... Petitioner

¶81

-vs-

¶82

1.The District Collector Ramanathapuram District Ramanathapuram-623 503

¶83

2.The Sub Collector Office of the Sub Collector Madurai Main Road Mani Nagar Paramakudi-623 707

¶84

3.The Thasildar Kadaladi Taluk Kadaladi Ramanathapuram District-623 703 ... Respondents

¶85

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue

¶86

a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the third respondent in Na.Ka.P3/7374/2024,

¶87

Page 8 of 14

¶88

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

¶89

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶90

dated 03.11.2025 and quash the same as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently directing the respondents to not to disturb the peaceful, passive residence and survival of the petitioner in Survey No.607/12, Aapanoor

¶91

Group.

¶92

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Shanmuga Raja

¶93

For Respondents : Mr.D.Sasi Kumar Additional Government Pleader

¶94

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶95

[Order of the Court was made by DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.]

¶96

Mr.D.Sasi Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents.

¶97

2. Being aggrieved by the orders, dated 03.11.2025, passed by the third respondent, under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, directing the petitioners herein to remove the encroachments made by them in the subject land, these writ petitions have been filed, on the ground that adequate opportunity was not given to them before passing the impugned orders.

¶98

Page 9 of 14

¶99

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

¶100

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶101

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that when the villagers opposed the illegal business run by a bootlegger, she submitted a representation to the respondents seeking to remove the encroachments made in the subject land and since the said representation was not considered by the respondents, she filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.(MD) No. 4198 of 2025 seeking a direction to the respondents to remove the encroachments made in the subject land by considering her representation and this Court, by an order dated 18.03.2025, directed the respondents to consider the said representation and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law by giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner in the said writ petition as well as the aggrieved persons within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Though this Court, in the said order, had specifically directed the respondents to afford an opportunity to the aggrieved persons as well, the respondents have not given any opportunity to the petitioners herein, who are all the aggrieved persons, enabling them to submit their explanation.

¶102

Page 10 of 14

¶103

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

¶104

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶105

4. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that before proceeding with passing of the impugned orders dated 03.11.2025 under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, adequate notices were issued to the petitioners and orders were passed on 10.05.2025 after due enquiry and thereafter, notices, under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, were issued on 18.09.2025 to the petitioners calling upon them to submit their explanation on or before 17.10.2025 as to why the encroachments made by them should not be removed and therefore, only after following the procedures as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, the impugned orders have been passed and it is incorrect on the part of the petitioners to say that adequate opportunity was not given to them before passing the impugned orders under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905.

¶106

5. This Court, on perusing the records, finds that the action to remove the encroachments has been emanated from the order, dated 18.03.2025, passed in W.P.(MD) No.4198 of 2025 and thereafter, after causing notices under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act,

¶107

________________ Page 11 of 14_

¶108

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

¶109

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶110

1905, giving opportunity to the petitioners to show cause as to why the encroachments made by them should not be removed, the present impugned orders under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, have been passed.

¶111

6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.4198 of 2025, namely, K.Parvathy, is also one of the encroachers in the subject land.

¶112

7. In response to the said submission, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that if the petitioner in W.P. (MD) No.4198 of 2025 is also one of the encroachers, she will also be issued a notice and necessary steps will be taken by the respondents for removal of the encroachment alleged to have been made by her in the subject land.

¶113

8. Taking into consideration the above submissions, this Court is of the view that the impugned orders have been passed by the third respondent only after affording an opportunity to the petitioners and therefore, there is no merit in these writ petitions.

¶114

Page 12 of 14

¶115

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

¶116

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶117

9. Accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed. No costs.

¶118

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶119

[G.J., J.] [K.K.R.K., J.]

¶120

17.12.2025

¶121

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

¶122

krk

¶123

To: 1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram-623 503.

¶124

2.The Sub Collector, Office of the Sub Collector, Madurai Main Road, Mani Nagar, Paramakudi-623 707.

¶125

3.The Thasildar, Kadaladi Taluk, Kadaladi, Ramanathapuram District-623 703.

¶126

________________ Page 13 of 14_

¶127

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

¶128

W.P.(MD) No.36047 of 2025 etc. batch

¶129

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J. AND K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

¶130

krk

¶131

W.P.(MD) Nos.36047, 36048, 36049, 36050, 36051, 36052 & 36053 of 2025 and

¶132

W.M.P.(MD) Nos.28647, 28650, 28652, 28646, 28648, 28651, 28693, 28694, 28695, 28661, 28662, 28664, 28656, 28657, 28658, 28653, 28654, 28655, 28699, 28700 & 28701 of 2025

¶133

17.12.2025

¶134

________________ Page 14 of 14_

¶135

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

A.Natarajan v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Natarajan v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Baskaran Vs The District Collector

G.P.Hahnemann Vs The Health Secretary

Baskaran Vs The District Collector

The Chief Project Manager/ Co-ordination, Vs Shanmuga Sundaram.C

N.Sathiya Jothi Vs The Divisional Engineer

The Director General Vs R.Balamurugan