IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. SUNDAR and K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, JJ.
Roja Amma – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary to the Government – Respondent
W.P. No.13698 of 2025 and W.M.P. No.15395 of 2025
Decided on : 22-04-2025
(A) Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 - Section 6 and 10 - Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 - Section 28(2)(ii) - Writ petition challenging notices for removal of alleged encroachments issued without proper details - The court found that the notices lacked necessary survey numbers, impeding the petitioner's ability to respond effectively - The court emphasized the requirement of a show cause notice before removal of encroachments as per statutory provisions. (Paras 5, 6, 7, and 8)
(B) Writ Jurisdiction - The court reiterated that notices must comply with statutory requirements to ensure fair opportunity for response. (Paras 5 and 6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a septuagenarian, inherited properties from her deceased son and faced notices claiming encroachments on land allegedly part of the Coovam River, without prior show cause notices.
Findings of Court:
The court set aside the impugned notices for failing to specify survey numbers, directing proper notice issuance for any alleged encroachments.
Issues: The main issue was whether the notices issued for removal of encroachments complied with statutory requirements, particularly the necessity of including survey numbers.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the absence of survey numbers in the notices violated the petitioner's right to respond effectively, thus rendering the notices invalid.
Result: Writ petition stands disposed of on the stated terms.
ORDER
[made by K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.]
This writ petition is directed against the letter dated 05.03.2025 addressed by the fourth respondent (Assistant Divisional Engineer- Highways) and the notice dated 07.03.2025 issued by the fifth respondent (Divisional Engineer-Highways), both to the writ petitioner.
2. The facts which gave rise to this writ petition and which are necessary for deciding this writ petition are as follows:
2.1. The petitioner, a septuagenarian, claims that her son was the owner of the land and building at Door No.48, 48/1, 49 and 50, Amman Street, Rail Nagar, Mettukulam, Koyambedu, Chennai, comprised in old Survey No.155/1 Part, new T.S. Nos.5,6,7 and 8, Block No.34, Koyambedu Village, now Aminjikarai Taluk, Chennai District.
2.2. According to the writ petitioner, patta was issued for the aforesaid properties in favour of her son and after his demise, she has inherited the aforesaid properties and she has been in possession and enjoyment of the same.
2.3. It is the case of the writ petitioner that on 22.01.2019, three notices (in respect of three door numbers, viz., Door Nos.48, 48/1 and 49) issued under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act , 1905, (for short “the 1905 Act”) were issued stating that the aforesaid properties are a part of the Coovam River and hence, she should vacate the same.
2.4. Since notices under Section 7 of the 1905 Act did not precede the aforesaid notices dated 22.01.2019, the writ petitioner preferred W.P.Nos.4016, 4017 and 4021 of 2019 assailing the notices dated 22.01.2019 which were disposed of by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide common order dated 21.03.2019, the operative portion of which reads as follows:
“5. In view of the fact that the petitioner is impugning the notices issued under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act , 1905, the petitioner has a remedy of appeal under Section 10 of the said Act. As the petitioner has efficacious alternate remedy of preferring appeals under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act , 1905, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned notices and the petitioner is relegated to the remedy of preferring appeals.
6. The writ petitions are disposed of with the above observation. No costs. Consequently, W.M.P. Nos.4468, 4469 and 4471 of 2019 are closed.”
2.5. Pursuant to the aforesaid common order, the writ petitioner preferred an appeal dated 27.03.2019 along with a stay petition before the second respondent (District Collector) under Section 10 of the 1905 Act. Pending the said appeal, on 28.11.2020, four demolition notices were issued by the third respondent (Assistant Executive Engineer, Public Works Department) fixing the date of demolition as 30.11.2020.
2.6. Thereagainst, the writ petitioner preferred four writ petitions being W.P.Nos.19146, 19149, 19151 and 19153 of 2020. In the said writ petitions, the writ petitioner sought a further relief of a direction for disposal of her appeal under Section 10 of the 1905 Act.
2.7. The said batch of four writ petitions was disposed of by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide a common order dated 16.12.2020, the relevant portion of which reads as follows:
“6. A perusal and consideration of the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, coupled with the materials available on record, would prima facie disclose that there is no proof as to the filing and entertainability of the appeal, however, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, would submit that the appeal has been filed and the same has been entertained. This Court, taking note of the above facts and circumstances, without going into the merits of the claim as projected by the petitioner either in the appeal dated 27.03.2019 or in the present writ petition, directs the first respondent to entertain the appeal filed by the petitioner, if the papers are otherwise in order, and take up the petition for stay at the first instance and give a disposal,
Notices for removal of encroachments must include specific survey numbers to ensure compliance with statutory requirements and allow for effective response.
Procedural compliance under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act is mandatory, and failure to issue a requisite prior notice invalidates subsequent actions taken by authorities.
A writ petition challenging proceedings under the Land Encroachment Act is premature if alternative remedies exist.
A show cause notice under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act does not justify a writ proceeding; the petitioner may submit explanations for the competent authority's consideration before any enforc....
Mandamus directs authorities to follow Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act procedure for encroachment removal.
Local authorities must provide due process and opportunity to respond before taking action on notices regarding land encroachments.
Judicial review in writ proceedings does not cover merits unless the notice is issued by an incompetent authority, focusing on jurisdiction under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act.
The court established that eviction proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, allowing encroachers to present objections before any coercive action is taken.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.