A.Vijayakumari Vs The Tahsildar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

A.Vijayakumari Vs The Tahsildar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Mandamus effected as directions: first respondent (Tahsildar, Aruppukkottai) to survey and demarcate Survey No.417/4 alone as per the petitioner's sale deed, after issuing notice to the petitioner and the second respondent, with jurisdictional police protection if required, adhering to the prescribed Standard Operating Procedure, completion within twelve weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the first respondent (Tahsildar) to survey and demarcate the petitioner's land in SF.No.417/4 of Villipathiri Village, Aruppukottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District, with jurisdictional police protection if necessary, in consonance with section 10(1) of the Tamil Nadu Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923, based on application No.2026/N123/26/000401 dated 17.03.2026 and representation dated 20.03.2026. +1 more

Court's answer

First respondent (Tahsildar) directed to conduct a survey in respect of Survey No.417/4 alone, as per the petitioner's sale deed, after issuing notice to the petitioner as well as to the second respondent.

Ratio / Principle

The survey is confined to Survey No.417/4 alone, consistent with the petitioner's entitlement being limited to Survey No.417/4 (Survey No.417/2 having been held to be a pathway); the petitioner is not to be surveyed in respect of Survey No.417/2.

Key takeaways

If the first respondent requires police protection for the survey, the same shall be provided by the jurisdictional police.ratio¶26
Official respondents shall adhere to the prescribed Standard Operating Procedures: notice of survey issued on reaching the spot and signed by the petitioner on receipt; after survey the petitioner signs indicating the survey was conducted to their satisfaction; if dissatisfied, the petitioner signs indicating dissatisfaction or protest and states the reason.ratio¶26
The aforesaid procedure shall be strictly followed by the parties, and the entire survey exercise shall be completed within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ of Mandamus disposed — survey and demarcation of SF.No.417/4, Villipathiri Village, Aruppukottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court (S. Srimathy, J.) disposed of a petition under Article 226 seeking direction to the Tahsildar to survey and demarcate the petitioner's land in SF.No.417/4 in consonance with section 10(1) of the Tamil Nadu Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923, based on application No.2026/N123/26/000401 dated 17.03.2026 and representation dated 20.03.2026. Background: the petitioner, earlier arrayed as sixth respondent for alleged encroachment of a pathway, faced a Division Bench order dated 18.03.2025 in W.P.(MD) No.7518 of 2024 directing removal of encroachment, and this Court's order dated 11.02.2026 in W.P.(MD) No.2953 of 2026 held the new Survey No.417/2 to be a pathway (“Pathai”) with the petitioner entitled only to Survey No.417/4. Directing survey of Survey No.417/4 alone as per the petitioner's sale deed (Document No.3922 of 2013 dated 22.11.2013), after notice to the petitioner and the second respondent, with jurisdictional police protection if required, and prescribing a Standard Operating Procedure of signed acknowledgements (on receipt of notice; after survey; or with protest stating reasons if dissatisfied), the Court ordered the exercise completed within twelve weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; no order as to costs.