Disposed¶28

Mayandi v. The Tahsildar

Madras HC9 Apr 2026WP(MD)/9881/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition W.P(MD)No.9881 of 2026, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, decided 09.04.2026 by N. Sathish Kumar, J. (with M. Jothiraman, J.). Petitioner Mayandi challenged Tahsildar, Bodinayakkanur (Theni District) proceedings Na.Ka.No.1311/2026/A7 dated 17.03.2026 ordering encroachment removal. Petition disposed on the terms sought: survey in petitioner's presence; any encroachment by petitioner to be removed by due process of law after affording him an opportunity, within one month. Keywords: certiorarified mandamus, Article 226, encroachment removal, survey and demarcation, due process/natural justice opportunity, Tahsildar/BDO/Firka Surveyor, no costs.

What did the court decide?

With the above directions, the Writ Petition disposed of; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition (WMP(MD)No.7823 of 2026) closed. ¶28

Mayandi Vs The Tahsildar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.9881 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated : 09.04.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

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

¶6

W.P(MD)No.9881 of 2026 and WMP(MD)No.7823 of 2026

Mayandi

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Tahsildar, Bodinayakkanur, Theni District.

¶11

The Block Developmental Officer, Panchayat Union Office, Bodinayakkanur, Theni District.

¶12

The Firka Surveyor, Rasingapuram, Theni District.

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records relating to the impugned proceedings of the 1^st respondent in Na.Ka.No.1311/2026/A7 dated 17.03.2026 and

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

W.P(MD)No.9881 of 2026

¶18

quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to conduct survey and thereafter demarcate the encroachment and then to proceed further by giving opportunity to the petitioner in a manner known to law.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jerin Mathew For R1 & R3 : Mr.D.Sasikumar Additional Government Pleader

¶20

ORDER

¶21

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

¶22

Though the petitioner has challenged the impugned communication dated 17.03.2026, whereby, the 1^st respondent/Tahsildar directed the 2^nd respondent/BDO to remove the encroachment mentioned in the said communication, today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is suffice if survey is directed to be conducted in the presence of the petitioner and then the encroachment, if any by the petitioner may be removed by due process of law within a time frame.

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

W.P(MD)No.9881 of 2026

¶26

Recording the above submission, the respondents are

¶27

directed to conduct survey in the subject place in the presence of the petitioner. If it is found that the petitioner has made encroachment, then such encroachment shall be removed by due process of law after affording opportunity to the petitioner, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶28