SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Mad) 818

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. VENUGOPAL, S. VAIDYANATHAN, JJ.
M. Periyasamy – Petitioner
Versus
The District Collector, (Collectorate Campus), Perambalaur & Another – Respondents
W.P. No. 1943 of 2018 & W.M.P. Nos. 2435 & 2436 of 2018
Decided On : 07-02-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:S. Deepika, Advocate
For the Respondents: A.N. Thambidurai, Special Government Pleader

The central legal point established is that procedural irregularities under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 can render notices invalid, and the authority must follow the specified procedure for issuing prior notice to the person in occupation.

Headnote:

Dalit Rights - Land Encroachment - Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 - Section 6, Section 7 - The court set aside the impugned notice dated 07.12.2017 issued under Section 6 of the Act, 1905, as the authority did not follow the procedure specified under Section 7 for issuing prior notice to the person in occupation.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, belonging to a downtrodden community, claimed possession of a property in a village and demanded worship rights with the village deity. The village people denied their rights, leading to communal clashes and legal proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905.

Finding of the Court:

The court set aside the impugned notice dated 07.12.2017 and directed the District Collector to dispose of the pending appeal, ensuring the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the property is not disturbed until final orders are passed.

Issues: Violation of worship rights, communal clashes, land encroachment, and procedural irregularities under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the impugned notice was invalid as the authority did not follow the procedure specified under Section 7 of the Act for issuing prior notice to the person in occupation.

Final Decision: The impugned notice dated 07.12.2017 was set aside, and the District Collector was directed to dispose of the pending appeal, ensuring the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the property is not disturbed until final orders are passed.

JUDGMENT :

M. Venugopal, J.

1. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the Learned Special Government Pleader for the Respondents.

2. No counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the Respondents. By consent on either side, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.

3. According to the Petitioner, he belongs to Downtrodden Community and live in Maruvathur Village since his birth. The petition mentioned property comes under the Natham Kudiyiruppu and he had constructed a tiled roof house and residing their for the past 30 years with his family and paying kist payments with the Panchayat. The Petitioner has Ration Card, Voter ID (issued in the year 1995), Aadhar Card etc. to show that he resides in the address at No.3/359, Keezha Theru, Maruvathur, Perambalur.

4. The stand of the Petitioner is that he along with other Downtrodden people are living in the colony and rest of the Caste Hindus live in the village and they are called as 'OOR' from the time immemorial in their villages as well as all over the Tamil Nadu State. The Petitioner has a Village Deity’s Temple and his community people had denied entry by the Caste Hindu People for the reasons that they are treated them as untouchables, even in ultra modern Era. They have also made written representations before the Village People as well as the Competent Authorities, but they were denied their rights etc.

5. From the year 2012, till 2017 several Peace Committee meetings were held in the presence of Tahsildar, District Collector and RDO, SD and DSP and other police officials. The Team leading the Village (Caste Hindus) are stubborn in their thoughts that the dalits are not permitted to enter the temple premises during June 2017, the Village People decided to celebrate Car Festivals for their village deities such as “Thirumodai Malaichamy”, “Sengamudayar”, “Oor Chuthiyar”, but they were not allowed to participate in the festival, when they objected for the same, communal clash occurred between village people and colony people. Later, another cases were registered against both the groups under Section 107/110 of the Cr.P.C. with a view to curb the communal threat and public tranquillity and the car festivals are stopped due to the aforesaid clash.

6. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner points out that a Team leading the Caste Hindus have started taking the dead bodies inside the colony stating that the pathway leading to graveyard has been encroached by the Colony People. In fact, there is a 30 feet pathway existing from the main Road to graveyard. However, the Village people wanted to trouble them, for the reason that the Petitioner and others are demanding their worship right with the Village Deity. Also, there is a separate pathway leading to graveyard, a dalit house situated in the middle has been demolished by the colony people to enable the village people to have a sufficient space to enter into the pathway leading to graveyard. But, the village people demanding the other four houses situated in Natham Kudiyiruppu to be demolished, which is in no way disturbing their entry to the pathway leading to the graveyard.

7. The main allegation against the Petitioner and others is that they had encroached the school compound, actually the school compound exists 15 feet away from the Petitioner’s Natham Kudiyiruppu. In fact, the village people have taken this pathway issue with a view to counter the Petitioner's worship demand.

8. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner vehemently contends that they are in possession and enjoyment of the property for the past 30 years without any disturbances from any one and the 2nd Respondent and other officials who are not able to convince the Caste Hindus in collusion with the Village People had issued the impugned Notice dated 07.12.2017 issued under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, (Act III of 1905) as against five of colony people indicating an indirect threat to them. In short, all of a sudden, the 2nd Responden






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top