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) 3768

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
M.J. David - Appellant
Versus
District Collector - Respondent
W.P. No. 32893 of 2014, Miscellaneous Petition No. 1 of 2014
Decided On : 26-09-2018

Advocates Appeared:
D. Ravichander, Adv., R.S. Selvam, Adv.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to prevent encroachments in water bodies and resources to protect public interest and the environment, as emphasized by the legal provisions and previous judgments cited by the court.

Headnote:

Encroachment - Government Land - Tamil Nadu Land Encroachments Act, 1905, Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Act, 2007 - The judgment discusses the encroachment of Government land by a Church and the legal provisions related to encroachment, including the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachments Act, 1905 and the Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Act, 2007. The court emphasizes the need to evict encroachments in water bodies and resources to protect public interest and the environment.

Fact of the Case:

The writ petitioner sought a direction to issue patta for a property classified as 'Government Poramboke Land' for the Church of Lamb Ministries. The respondents contended that the land was 'Kulam Poramboke', a water body, and patta cannot be issued due to Government rules and Supreme Court judgments.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the writ petitioner had encroached on Government land classified as a water body, which is objectionable and violates Government regulations and Supreme Court judgments. The court emphasized the need to prevent encroachments in water bodies and resources, citing legal provisions and previous judgments.

Issues: The main issue was whether the encroachment made by the writ petitioner in water bodies and water resources can be approved or not, considering the Government regulations and Supreme Court judgments.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that encroachment is an offence and discussed the legal definition of encroachment, citing the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. The court highlighted the need to protect water bodies and resources, citing constitutional provisions and previous judgments.

Final Decision: The relief sought by the writ petitioner was rejected, and the court directed the District Collector to convene review meetings, identify encroachments, and initiate immediate steps to evict all such encroachments in water bodies and resources within Villupuram District.

JUDGMENT

S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.

1. The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to direct the respondents to issue patta for the property situated at Villupuram District, Tindivanam Taluk, Kambur Village, within Survey No.130/3 Ac 0.25, in the name of "Church of Lamb Ministries".

2. The writ petitioner states that the property situated in Villupuram District, Tindivanam Taluk, Kambur Village, within Survey No.130/3 Ac 0.25, originally classified as "Government Poramboke Land". The writ petitioner claims that he is in occupation of the said land and accordingly, built a hut in the said property. The writ petitioner established a Church under the name and style of "Church of Lamb Ministries" and the writ petitioner is the Pastor of the Church and in-charge of the affairs of the above mentioned Church. It is contended that the villagers and the people around are regularly attending the Church for conducting prayers.

3. It is contended that for the erection of concrete structure for the above mentioned Church, permission from the various authorities namely, President of Kambur Panchayat, President of Olakkur Panchayat Union and also no objection from general public was sought by the writ petitioner. Pursuant to the same, the erection of concrete structure was commenced and the same had been completed in the year 2004. The electricity service connection was also obtained from the Electricity Board and house tax also being paid by the writ petitioner.

4. In this view of the matter, the writ petitioner submitted a representation for the issuance of patta in respect of the property described in the writ petition. However, the same has not been considered by the respondents. Thus, the writ petitioner is constrained to move the present writ petition.

5. The learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondents, relying on the counter-affidavit filed by the third respondent, states that the writ petitioner is an encroacher and willfully occupied the Government land in R.S.No.130/3, which has been classified as "Kulam Poramboke" in the Revenue Accounts, which is a water body. The total extent is 3.25.5 Hectare in which the Church has encroached 0.25 cents and had built the Church. In this connection, the present Pastor of the Church was served with a notice under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachments Act, 1905. As the land occupied by the writ petitioner is "Kulam Poramboke" and patta cannot be issued in view of the existing Government Rules and as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

6. The writ petitioner has occupied the "Kulam Poramboke Land", which is a water body. Thus, it is highly an objectionable area and even as per the communication issued by the Land Administration Department vide letter No.F1/27403/2006 dated 9.7.2007, it is clearly mentioned that "to restrain the further issue of house site pattas in water bodies and water course porambokes until further instruction from this office".

7. Thus, the writ petitioner is not entitled for any relief.

8. This Court is of an opinion that even as per the affidavit filed by the writ petitioner, the land was initially classified as "Government Poramboke". The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents relying on the counter-affidavit filed by the third respondent states that the land is classified as "Kulam Poramboke", which is a water body.

9. Thus, this Court has to consider the fact whether the encroachment made by the writ petitioner in water bodies and water resources can be approved or not. The Apex Court of India, time and again emphasised that the State is bound to evict all encroachers in respect of water bodies and water resources. Encroachments in water bodies and water resources are to be prevented and in the event of any such encroachments, the authorities competent are bound to evict the encroachers by following the procedures contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachments Act, 1905 or the Tamil Nadu Protection of Ta























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top