NAINAR SUNDARAM, J.:- These three writ appeals can be disposed of by a common judgment and they do arise out of a common order in three different writ petitions. The appellants herein were the petitioners/in the three writ petitions. The appellants challenged the notice given to them under S.6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, III of 1905, hereinafter referred to as the Act for their eviction from the lands occupied by them. The main contention put forth by the appellants was that they had not been served with a prior notice as laid down by S.7 of the Act, and this vitiates the entire proceedings. The learned single Judge who dealt with the writ petitions, ordered notice of action, and on service of such notice of motion, the learned Government Advocate representing the respondent stated-that notices were issued under S.7 of the Act to the appellants. The learned single Judge perused the records produced before him by the learned Government Advocate representing the respondent and found that the statements which formed part of the records only showed that notice under S.5 of the Act alone had come to be issued. Yet the learned single Judge opined that whether notice