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

2025 Supreme(Mad) 2745

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.SUNDAR, K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, JJ.
Ganesan - Appellant 
Versus 
The Commissioner - Respondent 
W.P.Nos.11767 and 11777 of 2025 & W.M.P Nos.13326 and 13339 of 2025
Decided on : 02-04-2025


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.G.Mohammed Aseef
For the Respondents: Mr.T.K.Saravanan

Authorities issuing show-cause notices must adhere to designated roles and principles of natural justice, providing affected parties a chance to respond before any encroachment actions are taken.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Act, 2007 - Jurisdiction of the Commissioner - Show-cause notices issued by the Commissioner were set aside on grounds of lack of jurisdiction as the officers responsible for issuance under the Act were not properly designated - Principles of natural justice must be adhered to when issuing encroachment notices. (Paras 8 - 14)

(B) Natural Justice - The court reiterated that before any removal of encroachment, affected parties must be given an opportunity to be heard as per established principles in prior judgments. (Paras 12 and 13)

Facts of the case:
The appellant challenged two show-cause notices issued regarding alleged encroachment on land under a municipal jurisdiction, arguing lack of authority from the Commissioner as per the Tanks Act, and that their objections were not considered.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the impugned notices were issued without proper authority, thus, were set aside, and a competent officer must issue fresh notices.

Issues: The main issues included the authority of the Commissioner to issue notices and the necessity of providing an opportunity for those accused of encroachment to respond.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to issue notices and emphasized that principles of natural justice must be observed in such proceedings.

Result: Impugned notices set aside.

Table of Content
1. impugned notices challenged by the writ petitioners. (Para 1 , 2)
2. jurisdiction and authority of r1 under tanks act discussed. (Para 3 , 5)
3. importance of proper notice and procedural adherence. (Para 4)
4. court's observations on jurisdiction and procedures under the tanks act. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
5. t.k.shanmugam case principles governing encroachment removal. (Para 9)
6. final order setting aside impugned notices. (Para 14)

ORDER :

M.SUNDAR, J.

In captioned 'Writ Petitions' ['WPs' in plural and 'WP' in singular for the sake of brevity], two notices, both signed by R1 (Commissioner, Tambaram Municipal Corporation) on 12.08.2024 and captioned 'Show- cause Notice' ['SCN' in singular and 'SCNs' in plural for the sake of brevity] have been assailed. These two notices shall be collectively referred to as 'impugned notices' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity.

2. Mr.G.Mohammed Aseef, learned counsel on record for the writ petitioners is before us. Adverting to the impugned notices, learned counsel submits that the subject matter of impugned notices is 'land comprised in Survey No.372/1, Town Survey No.2, Ward G, Block 5 in Jameen Pallavaram Village, Tambaram Corporation, Zone – 2, Chengalpattu District and the brick and mortar superstructure standing on the same' [hereinafter 'said property' for the sake of convenience and clarity].

3. Learned counsel for writ petitioners submits that R1 does not have the authority to issue SCNs as the same are under the 'Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Act, 2007 (Tamil Nadu Act 8 of 2007)' {hereinafter 'Tanks Act' for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity}. Notwithstanding this position, writ petitioners have responded to the impugned notices in and vide objections dated 27.03.2025 but without considering the objections or passing appropriate orders, hectic efforts are underway to remove writ petitioners from said property branding them as 'encroachers' under Tanks Act is learned counsel's further say.

4. Issue notice to respondents.

5. Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Additional Government Pleader accepts notice for all four respondents and submits that one Mr.S.P.Gandhi {President of Pallavaram 13th Ward Kudiiruppor Podhu Nala Sangam} filed a writ petition in W.P.No.10863 of 2024 with a plea for removal of encroachment/s, the same came to be disposed of by a Hon'ble Division Bench on 22.04.2024 and the impugned notices have been issued pursuant to such orders.

6. This Court carefully considered the case file and the submissions.

7. This Court finds that the scope of the captioned WPs is very limited and therefore, with the consent of learned counsel on both sides, main WPs were taken up in the Admission Board.

8. The first point urged by learned counsel for writ petitioners is a jurisdiction point. A perusal of the impugned notices styled 'SCNs' makes it clear that the same have been issued by R1 purportedly under Section 6(3) of Tanks Act. Section 6(3) talks about publication of a notice in the prescribed manner pointing out the boundaries of the Tank. Therefore, this provision does not enure to the benefit of the respondents insofar as impugned notices i.e., SCNs are concerned.

9. Before we proceed further, it is necessary to respectfully advert to order dated 22.04.2024 made by another Hon'ble Division Bench in W.P.No.10863 of 2024 about which there is allusion supra. Paragraph 2 of this 22.04.2024 order makes it clear that Survey No.372 has been sub- divided into Survey Nos.372/1, 372/2 and 372/3 which are pond, pattai and temple respectively. To be noted, as regards impugned notices, we are concerned only with Survey No.372/1, which is a pond. This means that the ratio laid down by a Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in T.K.Shanmugam case i.e., T.K.Shanmugam Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu and others reported in 2015 SCC OnLine Mad 9343 comes into play. In T.K.Shanmugam, the procedure to be followed as regards removal of encroach

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
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