Dismissed¶¶35

V.Vijayaraghavan v. The District Collector

Madras HC17 Mar 2026WP(MD)/7167/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ of mandamus; Article 226; removal of encroachment; Survey No.1258/11; Muthalamman Koil Street; Erichanatham Village; Sivakasi Taluk; Virudhunagar District; Natham land classification; Land Encroachment Act does not apply; public vacant land public pathway; O.S.No.80 of 2017 Sub Court Virudhunagar dismissed; A.S.No.68 of 2025 Additional District Court Virudhunagar pending; W.P.(MD)No.12492 of 2021 dated 20.12.2024; parties to agitate rights before civil court; writ petition dismissed; no costs.

What did the court decide?

None; the Court was not inclined to entertain the writ petition and dismissed it, with no order as to costs. ¶¶35

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the Court was not inclined to entertain the writ petition and dismissed it, with no order as to costs.

¶¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents 1 and 2 (District Collector and Tahsildar) can be directed by writ of mandamus to remove the encroachment made by the third respondent in Survey No.1258/11, Muthalamman Koil Street, Erichanatham Village, Sivakasi Taluk. +2 more

¶¶20

Ratio / Principle

As the land is classified as Natham land in the revenue records, the Land Encroachment Act does not apply.

¶¶33

Key takeaways

Since the issue regarding the subject property is pending before the competent civil Court, it is for the parties to agitate their rights before the civil Court and work out their remedy depending upon the outcome of the said appeal.ratio¶¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court (N. Sathish Kumar, J., author; M. Jothiraman, J.) dismisses a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in which the petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to remove the encroachment made by the third respondent in Survey No.1258/11 (0.00.54.0 square meter), Muthalamman Koil Street, Erichanatham Village, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District, in the light of the order in W.P.(MD)No.12492 of 2021 dated 20.12.2024. The suit filed by the third respondent claiming rights over the property (classified as public vacant land earmarked as public pathway), O.S.No.80 of 2017 before the Sub Court, Virudhunagar, was dismissed; his appeal A.S.No.68 of 2025 before the Additional District Court, Virudhunagar is pending. Holding that the land is classified as Natham land in the revenue records and hence the Land Encroachment Act does not apply, and that the issue over the subject property is pending before the competent civil Court, the Court held it is for the parties to agitate their rights before the civil Court and work out their remedy depending upon the outcome of the pending appeal. Writ petition dismissed; no order as to costs.

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.7167 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 17.03.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.7167 of 2026

V.Vijayaraghavan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

¶11

2.The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

¶12

3.P.Pandiyarajan ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to remove the encroachments made by the 3^rd respondent in Survey No.1258/11, to the extent of 0.00.54.0 Square meter, situated at Muthalamman Koil Street, Erichanatham Village, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District, in the light of the order in W.P.(MD)No.12492 of 2021 dated 20.12.2024, on the file of this Court.

¶14

1/5

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.(MD)No.7167 of 2026

¶17

For Petitioner : Ms.S.Mahalakshmi For Respondents : Mr.J.Ashok (R1 & R2) Additional Government Pleader Mr.G.Mohankumar (R3)

¶18

ORDER

¶19

(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)

¶20

This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to remove the encroachments made by the third respondent in Survey No.1258/11, to the extent of 0.00.54.0 Square meter, situated at Muthalamman Koil Street, Erichanatham Village, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District, in the light of the order in W.P.(MD)No.12492 of 2021 dated 20.12.2024, on the file of this Court.

¶21

2.According to the petitioner, the private respondent filed a suit for declaration claiming right over the subject property, which is classified as public vacant land earmarked as public pathway, in O.S.No. 80 of 2017 on the file of the Sub Court, Virudhunagar. The suit has been dismissed holding that the petitioner is not entitled for any such relief. However, the encroachment made by the private respondent in the public property has not been removed. The petitioner has made representations

¶22

2/5

¶23

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

¶24

W.P.(MD)No.7167 of 2026

¶25

in this regard. Since no action has been initiated, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

¶26

3.The learned counsel for the third respondent submits that as against the decree and judgment passed in O.S.No.80 of 2017 before the Sub Court, Virudhunagar, he filed an appeal in A.S.No.68 of 2025 on the file of the Additional District Court, Virudhunagar and the same is pending.

¶27

4.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents submits that in the revenue records, the land is classified as Natham Property. Since the subject property does not fall under the category of government land, it cannot be dealt with under the Land Encroachment Act or the third respondent cannot be treated as an encroacher.

¶28

5.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and

¶29

perused the materials placed on record.

¶30

3/5

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.(MD)No.7167 of 2026

¶33

6.Admittedly, the land is classified as Natham land in the revenue records and hence, the Land Encroachment Act does not apply. Further, the issue with regard to the subject property is pending before the competent civil Court. Hence, we hold that it is for the parties to agitate their right before the civil Court and work out their remedy depending upon the outcome of the said appeal.

¶34