V.Raji Vs The District Registrar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

V.Raji Vs The District Registrar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed recording the 4th respondent's submissions, with the Court clarifying that there is no impediment to the authorities laying a road in S.No.190/1 (classified as 'Pathai') and directing that there shall be no attempt to lay road in the petitioner's patta lands; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition (W.M.P.No.24662 of 2022) closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents 5 to 7 have made encroachments in S.No.190/1 of Edapadi Taluk, Salem District, classified as 'Pathai Poramboke', requiring removal by respondents 1 to 4. +1 more

Court's answer

There is no impediment for the authorities to lay a road in S.No.190/1, which is classified as 'Pathai'.

Ratio / Principle

There shall not be any attempt to lay road in the patta lands owned by the petitioner, for which the Revenue Authorities have issued patta.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Dr G. Jayachandran and Mrs N. Mala JJ.; order authored by G. Jayachandran J.) disposed of W.P. No.25655 of 2022 (with connected W.M.P. No.24662 of 2022), filed under Article 226 of the Constitution by V. Raji seeking a mandamus directing respondents 1 to 4 (District Collector, Revenue Divisional Officer, Tahsildar and Block Development Officer, Salem/Edapadi) to remove alleged encroachments by private respondents 5 to 7 in S.No.190/1 of Irupali Village, Edapadi Taluk, classified as 'Pathai Poramboke', and not to form any road through the petitioner's patta lands in S.Nos.187/1C, 187/1F, 190/2B, 190/2D, 190/2G and 190/2H. Recording the counter and status report of the 4th respondent that S.No.190/1 stands classified as pathway, is in use by residents, carries no encroachment, and that the road proposal affecting the patta lands was dropped long back, the Court made it clear that there is no impediment to the authorities laying a road in S.No.190/1 and that there shall be no attempt to lay road in the petitioner's patta lands. No costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed. Order dated 10-07-2026.

W.P. No.25655 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-07-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N. MALA

W.P.No.25655 of 2022

&

W.M.P.No.24662 of 2022

V.Raji, S/o Vellaya Gounder, Nadu Akkraipatty, Irupali Village, Edapadi Taluk, … Petitioner Salem District.

Vs.

The District Collector, Salem District, Salem.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sankari, Salem District.

3.The Tahsildar, Edapadi Taluk, Salem District.

4.The Block Development Officer, Edapadi Union, Salem District

5.Mathesh, S/o.Muthukaruppan, Nadu Akkraipatty, Irupali Village, Edapadi Taluk, Salem District.

Page Nos.1/6

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

W.P. No.25655 of 2022

6.Arumugam, S/o Muthukaruppan, Nadu Akkraipatty, Irupali Village, Edapadi Taluk, Salem District.

7.Arumugam, S/o Muthu, Nadu Akkraipatty, Irupali Village, Edapadi Taluk, Salem District.

… Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to remove the encroachment made by the respondents 5 to 7 in survey No. 190/1 of irupali village, Edapadi taluk, Salem District which is classified as pathai poramboke and restore the pathway in its original position consequently directing the respondents 1 to 4 not to form any road in petitioner patta land in survey numbers 187/1C, 187/1F, 190/2B 190/2D, 190/2G and 190/2H of Irupaali village, Edapadi taluk, salem District by considering the representation dated 17.08.2022 and 29.08.2022

For Petitioner: Mr.V.Regunathan

For Respondents: Mr.B.Sivakollappan, Govt. Advocate, for R1 to R4.

No appearance, for R5 to R7

Page Nos.2/6

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

W.P. No.25655 of 2022

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by G.Jayachandran J.)

The writ petition is filed alleging that respondents 5 to 7 have made encroachments in S.No.190/1, Edapadi Taluk, Salem District, which is classified as “Pathai Poramboke,” and further alleging that respondents 1 to 4 have attempted to form road in the patta lands of the petitioners situated in S.Nos.187/1C, 187/1F, 190/2B, 190/2D, 190/2G, and 190/2H.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, referring to Patta No.3009 issued in the names of Vellaiya Gounder, Chinnarasu, and Raji (the petitioner herein) and the A-Register of the village which shows S.No.190/1 as Government Poramboke classified as “Pathai,” submitted that instead of laying the road in S.No.190/1, the officials are attempting to lay the road in the petitioner’s patta lands.

3. The counter filed by the 4^th respondent, Block Development Officer, Edapadi, categorically states that S.No.190/1 is classified as pathway and is being used by the residents of the locality as pathway. It is further stated that there is no encroachment in the said pathway. However, when an attempt was made to lay pucca road in S.No.190/1, the petitioner and others objected and hence the proposal was dropped.

Page Nos.3/6

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

W.P. No.25655 of 2022

4. Insofar as the patta lands of the petitioner are concerned, it is categorically stated that the apprehension of the petitioner is baseless and that the respondents 1 to 4 have not made any attempt to lay road in his patta lands.

5. In paragraph No.7 of the status report, it is reiterated as follows: “It is humbly submitted that at present, there is no proposal to lay any road in S.No.190/1 as stated by the petitioner, and it is a baseless apprehension of the petitioner that respondents 1 to 4 are going to lay road in his patta lands, which proposal was dropped long back.”

6. Recording the above submission of the 4^th respondent, we dispose of the writ petition, making it clear that there is no impediment for the authorities to lay a road in S.No.190/1, which is classified as “Pathai,” and that there shall not be any attempt to lay road in the patta lands owned by the petitioner, for which the Revenue Authorities have issued patta. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

(Dr. G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.) & (N.MALA, J.) 10-07-2026

Index :Yes/No. Neutral Citation :Yes/No. bsm

Page Nos.4/6

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

W.P. No.25655 of 2022

To,

1.The District Collector, Salem District, Salem

2.The Revenue Divisional officer, Sankari Salem District

3.The Tahsildar, Edapadi Taluk, Salem District.

4.The Block Development Officer, Edapadi Union, Salem District.

Page Nos.5/6

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

W.P. No.25655 of 2022

Dr. G.JAYACHANDRAN, J. AND N.MALA, J. bsm

W.P.No.25655 of 2022 & W.M.P.No.24662 of 2022

10-07-2026

Page Nos.6/6

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