Back
2025 Supreme(Mad) 4472
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S.M. Subramaniam, A.D.Maria Clete, JJ.
A.Manimaran - Petitioner
Versus
The Tahsildar, Vadipatti and ors. – Respondents
W.P.(MD) No.18554 of 2025
Decided On : 09-07-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.M.Mithun
For the Respondent: Mr.M.Sarangan, Additional Government Pleader, Mr. S.P. Maharajan, Special Government Pleader
Only the jurisdictional Tahsildar can issue notices for removal of encroachments under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, not the Block Development Officer.
Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 - Jurisdiction of Block Development Officer - Notice issued for removal of encroachment by the Block Development Officer is without jurisdiction, as the power to issue such notice lies with the jurisdictional Tahsildar after proper procedures are followed. (Paras 3 and 4)
Facts of the case:
The writ petition was filed against a notice issued by the Block Development Officer for removal of encroachment, which the court found to be lacking jurisdiction.
Findings of Court:
The impugned notice was set aside, directing the Block Development Officer to submit a report to the jurisdictional Tahsildar for appropriate action.
Issues: The main issue addressed was the jurisdiction of the Block Development Officer to issue removal notices under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that only the Tahsildar has the authority to issue removal notices as per the provisions outlined in the Act, emphasizing the need for proper procedural compliance.
Result: Writ petition allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. judicial notice taken of representation for the respondents. (Para 1) |
| 2. final hearing consent. (Para 2) |
| 3. block development officer's lack of authority. (Para 3) |
| 4. setting aside of improper notice and directions issued. (Para 4) |
| 5. dismissal of petition with directives. (Para 5) |
ORDER :
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Mr.M.Sarangan, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.S.P.Maharajan, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice for the fourth respondent.
2. With the consent of both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself.
3. The impugned notice has been issued by the Block Development Officer, Alanganallur. The said notice was issued for removal of encroachment. Under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, the Block Development Officer has no power to issue such notice. However, the Block Development Officer has to submit a report to the jurisdictional Tahsildar by providing details regarding encroachments enabling the Tahsildar to issue a notice for removal of encroachments and to remove the encroachments by following the procedures as contemplated under the said Act.
4. In view of the fact that the impugned notice, dated 08.04.2025, issued by the Block Development Officer, Alanganallur, is without jurisdiction, the same is set aside. However, the Block Development Officer, Alanganallur, is directed to submit a report to the jurisdictional Tahsildar by providing the details regarding encroachments, who in turn is directed to initiate all appropriate action to remove the encroachments by following the procedures as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. The said exercise is directed to be completed within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. With the above observation, this writ petition is allowed. No costs.
