Dismissed¶45

Ramesh v. a.Mokkamayan

Madras HC13 Feb 2026WA(MD)/173/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: communal stone inscription; Government poramboke land; public chavadi; Survey No. 189/5, Ayyanarkulam Village, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District; encroachment of public land; criminal trespass; inscription confers no title or right; removal of trespassers; penal action for land-grab; writ appeal dismissed; Clause 15 of Letters Patent; W.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2026; order dated 03.02.2026; no costs; C.M.P.(MD) No.1782 of 2026 closed; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.

What did the court decide?

Official respondents directed to carry out the directions issued by the learned Single Judge in the order dated 03.02.2026 in W.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2026 (removal of the communal stone inscription) forthwith; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition C.M.P.(MD) No.1782 of 2026 closed. ¶45

Ramesh Vs a.Mokkamayan — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶45

Issue for consideration

Whether the communal stone inscription fixed by a community on the Government poramboke land (public chavadi, Survey No. 189/5, Ayyanarkulam Village, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District) confers any title or right on that community, and whether the writ appeal against the learned Single Judge's direction to remove it should succeed. +1 more

¶36

Court's answer

A communal stone inscription placed on public (Government poramboke) land by way of criminal trespass confers no title or right on any particular community; the inscription showing the public chavadi as owned by the communities mentioned therein is per se contrary to the candid admission of the appellants' counsel that the subject land is a public land owned by the Government.

¶40

Ratio / Principle

Trespassers are to be removed forthwith and penal action is to be taken against the attempt to grab the public land by force.

¶44

Key takeaways

On the above reasoning the writ appeal is devoid of merits; accordingly it is dismissed and the official respondents are directed to carry out the directions issued by the learned Single Judge in the order dated 03.02.2026 in W.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2026 forthwith.ratio¶44

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.A.(MD) No.173 of 2026 and C.M.P.(MD) No.1782 of 2026 (Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; coram DR.G.Jayachandran and K.K.Ramakrishnan, JJ.; judgment delivered by DR.G.Jayachandran, J.), decided 13.02.2026: Four appellants — who were respondents 7 to 10 in W.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2026 — appealed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the learned Single Judge's order dated 03.02.2026 directing the revenue authorities to remove a communal stone inscription installed in the public chavadi situated on the Government poramboke land in Survey No. 189/5 of Ayyanarkulam Village, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District. Counsel for the appellants conceded that the chavadi stands on Government poramboke land over which persons of all communities have rights; the inscription nevertheless showed the chavadi as owned by the communities mentioned therein. Holding that placing such an inscription on public land by criminal trespass confers no title or right to a particular community, that trespassers are to be removed forthwith, and that penal action is to be taken against attempts to grab public land by force, the Court found the writ appeal devoid of merits, dismissed it, directed the official respondents to carry out the Single Judge's directions forthwith, awarded no costs, and closed the connected miscellaneous petition.

¶1

W.A.(MD) No.173 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 13.02.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

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

¶6

W.A.(MD) No.173 of 2026 and C.M.P.(MD) No.1782 of 2026

¶7

1.Ramesh

¶8

2.R.Chandran

¶9

3.Thavamani

¶10

4.Pragalathan

¶11

... Appellants

¶12

-vs-

¶13

1.A.Mokkamayan

¶14

2.The District Collector Madurai District

¶15

3.The Superintendent of Police Madurai District

¶16

4.The Tahsildar Usilampatti Taluk Madurai District

¶17

Page 1 of 7

¶18

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

¶19

W.A.(MD) No.173 of 2026

¶20

5.The Revenue Divisional Officer Usilampatti Madurai District

¶21

6.The Inspector of Police Uthapanayakkanur Police Station Madurai District

¶22

7.The Sub Inspector of Police Uthapanayakkanur Police Station Madurai District ... Respondents

¶23

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order, dated 03.02.2026, passed in W.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2026 and W.M.P. (MD) No.2374 of 2026, on the file of this Court.

¶24

For Appellants : Mr.Kannan Gurusami For Respondents : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar for R1 Mr.S.P.Maharajan Special Government Pleader for R2, R4 & R5 Mr.K.Gnanasekaran Govt. Advocate (Criminal Side) for R3, R6 & R7

¶25

Page 2 of 7

¶26

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

¶27

J U D G M E N T

¶28

W.A.(MD) No.173 of 2026

¶29

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

¶30

This writ appeal is filed by the respondents 7 to 10 in the writ petition being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge directing the revenue authorities to remove the communal stone inscription installed in the public chavadi situated on the Government poramboke land in Survey No. 189/5 of Ayyanarkulam Village, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District.

¶31

2. According to the appellants herein, the said land is in enjoyment of their community people and without any notice, attempt was made to remove the stone inscription from the said land.

¶32

3. On the other hand, Mr.N.Dilip Kumar, learned counsel, who takes notice for the first respondent, on instructions, submits that the revenue records clearly indicate that the subject land is a Government poramboke land and whereas, the appellants herein are trying to make an exclusive claim over the subject land by fixing a stone inscription as if the subject land belongs to their community people.

¶33

Page 3 of 7

¶34

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

¶35

W.A.(MD) No.173 of 2026

¶36

4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants concedes that the public chavadi situates in a Government poramboke land, over which the persons of all community people have right and therefore, there is no illegality in fixing the stone inscription by their community people.

¶37

5. This Court had a privilege of looking at the communal stone inscription, which is now directed to be removed by the learned Single Judge, and it reads as below:

¶38

“ ma;adhh; Fsk;

¶39

cyfhap kf;fs; ,uz;L Njth; tifawhf;fSf;F ghj;jpag;gl;l ke;ij ”

¶40

6. The above inscription shows that the public chavadi is owned by the communities mentioned therein and it is per se contrary to the candid admission of the learned counsel for the appellants that the subject land is a public land owned by the Government. By a criminal trespass, placing a communal stone inscription in the public land will not confer any title or right to a particular community people. Trespassers are to be removed forthwith

¶41

_____________ Page 4 of 7_

¶42

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

¶43

W.A.(MD) No.173 of 2026

¶44

and penal action is to be taken against the attempt to grab the public land by force. Therefore, we find that this writ appeal is devoid of merits.

¶45

7. Accordingly, this writ appeal is dismissed. The official respondents are directed to carry out the directions issued by the learned Single Judge in the order dated 03.02.2026 in W.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2026 forthwith. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶46

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

¶47

13.02.2026

¶48

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

¶49

krk

¶50

To:

¶51

1.The District Collector, Madurai District.