Erumapalayam Kongu Nagar Samuga v. the District Collector

Madras HC17 Mar 2026WP/44127/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: writ of certiorari; Article 226; Tahsildar Hasthampatti Salem; Inspector of Police Kichipalayam Police Station; police protection for encroachment removal; Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act; Section 10; District Collector Salem order dated 17.03.2025; liberty to approach District Collector; representation considered on merits; interdepartmental communication; WP No. 44127 of 2025; Madras High Court; disposed of, no costs; Neutral Citation 2026:MHC:1185.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with liberty: the petitioner may approach the District Collector if any action has been taken contrary to the District Collector's order, and the District Collector may consider any such representation on merits. No costs imposed; connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, closed. ¶¶31

Erumapalayam Kongu Nagar Samuga Vs the District… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 10.11.2025 in Na.Ka.1628/2025 (A2) - the interdepartmental communication between the Tahsildar, Salem and the Inspector of Police seeking police protection for removal of encroachment - should be quashed by writ of certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶¶24

Court's answer

If at all any action has been taken contrary to the order passed by the District Collector, it is left open to the petitioner to approach the District Collector for appropriate remedy.

¶¶27

Ratio / Principle

In the event of receiving any such representation from the petitioner, the District Collector may consider the same on merits and take an appropriate decision in the manner known to law.

¶¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (order authored by S.M. Subramaniam J.; sitting with K. Surender J.), WP No. 44127 of 2025, decided 17-03-2026: A writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India sought certiorari to quash the 2nd respondent Tahsildar's proceedings dated 10.11.2025 in Na.Ka.1628/2025 (A2) - an interdepartmental communication addressed to the Inspector of Police, Kichipalayam Police Station, Salem seeking police protection for removal of encroachment pursuant to a final notice under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act. Counsel pointed out that the District Collector had already passed an order on 17.03.2025 under Section 10 of the Act. Without quashing the impugned communication, the Court left it open to the petitioner, if any action was taken contrary to the District Collector's order, to approach the District Collector for appropriate remedy; the Collector may consider any representation on merits and take an appropriate decision in the manner known to law. Writ petition disposed of with this liberty; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

¶1

2026:MHC:1185

¶2

WP No. 44127 of 2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶4

DATED: 17-03-2026

¶5

CORAM

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K. SURENDER

¶9

WP No. 44127 of 2025

¶10

Erumapalayam Kongu Nagar Samuga Represented By Its President, S. Perumal @ Raja, S/o. Sengodan, 3/392, Sengodan Thottam, Erumapalayam, Selam-15

¶11

..Petitioner(s)

¶12

¶13

The District Collector Office Of District Collector, Salem-1.

¶14

The Thasildar Office Of Thasildar, Hasthampatti, Salem-7

¶15

V.Vijayan (R3 Impleaded Vide Order Dated 21.11.2025 Made In Wmp.50385/2025 In WP.44127/2025)

¶16

..Respondent(s)

¶17

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India issuing writ of certiorari calling for the records with respect of the impugned proceedings of the 2^nd Respondent dated 10.11.2025 in Na.Ka.1628/2025 (A2) and quash the same.

¶18

For Petitioner(s): Mr. R.Nalliyappan For Respondent(s): Mr.T.Arunkumar Additional Government Pleader for R1 and R2 Mr.K.Vasantha Nayagan for Mr.L.Ramanathan for R3

¶19

Page1 of 4

¶20

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

¶21

WP No. 44127 of 2025

¶22

ORDER

¶23

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

¶24

The present writ petition has been instituted challenging the interdepartmental communication between the Tahsildar, Salem and Inspector of Police, Kichipalayam Police Station, Salem.

¶25

In view of the final notice issued for removal of encroachment under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, the Tahsildar addressed a letter to the Inspector of Police for providing protection for removal of encroachment.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that even before the impugned communication, District Collector passed an order on 17.03.2025 under Section 10 of the Act. Therefore, Tahsildar is bound by the said Act.

¶27

If at all any action has been taken contrary to the order passed by District Collector, it is left open to the petitioner to approach the District Collector for appropriate remedy. In the event of receiving any such representation, District Collector may consider the same on merits and take an appropriate decision in the manner known to law.

¶28

Page2 of 4

¶29

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

¶30

WP No. 44127 of 2025

¶31