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

2026 Supreme(Mad) 229

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V. Lakshminarayanan, J.
K.S.Balakrishnan - Petitioner
Versus
The District Collector, District Collectorate - Respondent
W.P.Nos.36402, 37501 & 44377 of 2025 In W.P.No.36402 of 2025
Decided On : 11-02-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ms. Jhansi Greeta for Mr.M.Sreedharan
For the Respondent: Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal, Additional Government Pleader, Mr.Arun Anbumani

The court emphasized the necessity for compliance with statutory regulations regarding burials, reaffirming that unauthorized disturbances of burial grounds are unlawful.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 - Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998 - Constitutional obligations on Town Panchayats regarding burial grounds - Dispute arose over land usage and classification of certain survey numbers, claimed by some as traditional burial grounds while others sought reclassification to prevent access. (Paras 41-45)

(B) Classification of land by revenue authorities must reflect actual usage - Court noted long-standing practices regarding burial on disputed plots, urged respect for dignity of the deceased. (Paras 62-66)

(C) Regulatory compliance with Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Rules, 2023 necessary for burials - Permit required for burial, illegal actions noted against individuals disturbing graves. (Paras 54-59)

Facts of the case:
Three writ petitions concerning the use of specific lands as burial grounds, with claims from multiple parties on the historical usage and legality of land reclassification efforts. Key claims included environmental concerns and access issues for local residents. (Paras 2-8)

Findings of Court:
The court found persistent usage of the lands in question as burial grounds while calling for adherence to relevant legal frameworks for proper classification and management. Orders directed for the District Collector to ensure segregation and protection of burial sites. (Paras 67)

Issues: The legitimacy of land classification and access issues regarding traditional burial sites; enforcement of regulations under relevant statutes.

Ratio Decidendi: Recognition of the need for compliance with established legal frameworks governing burial practices; emphasized the importance of respecting the rights and dignities of the deceased and their families. (Paras 62-64)

Result: Writ Petition disposed with significant directives to local governing bodies on managing burial grounds, dismissing the opposing petitions. (Paras 67)

Table of Content
1. s.no.621/3 and s.no.628/8 usage disputes (Para 1 , 5 , 6 , 19 , 24)
2. historical usage of land for burial (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 28)
3. local governance and compliance with burial laws (Para 13 , 14 , 25 , 30 , 32)
4. responsibilities of town panchayat regarding burial grounds (Para 22 , 60)
5. dignity of the dead and legal obligations under relevant statutes (Para 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 66 , 67)

ORDER :

V. Lakshminarayanan, J.

Since the issues involved in all the three writ petitions are one and the same, the writ petitions were clubbed together and taken up for disposal.

Facts leading to W.P.No.36402 of 2025

2. The petitioner approached this court stating that he is the owner of the property situated in R.S.No.628/1 and R.S.No.628/4 of Karumandiselli Palayam Village, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District. In order to reach his property, he uses a cart track situated in RS.No.621/3 and RS.No.628/8 of the same village. He pleaded that this cart track has been in existence for decades and serves as a primary route connecting Kanchi Koil Road to Bhavani Main Road via Pandian Road.

3. The petitioner alleged that a few individuals of Karumandiselli Palayam Village encroached upon the cart track and started misusing the same by dumping garbage and conducting cremation. These activities resulted in polluting the environment and obstructing public access.

4. The cause of action for this writ petition is that it has come to his knowledge that the individuals, who were indulging in the aforesaid acts, are making attempts to reclassify the cart track as a burial ground. He points out that 1.5 km away from the cart track, a well maintained and hygienically operated modern incinerator and burial ground facilities have been established. He urges that despite the existence of this designated facility, certain individuals are utilising the cart track for their nefarious purposes. He added that in the vicinity of the cart track, there are about 500 residential houses. He urges that if the cart track is reclassified as burial ground, he will not have any access to his property. This is because, once reclassified, barbed wire will be erected across the cart track, thus preventing access not only for the petitioner but also for the others.

5. Alarmed at the attempt of reclassification, the petitioner gave a representation on 01.09.2025 calling upon the authorities to take appropriate action. Despite the representation having been received, no action was forthcoming. Hence, he approached this court seeking a writ of mandamus to forebear the respondents from reclassifying RS No.621/3 and RS.No.628/8 of Karumandiselli Palayam Village, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District from the present classification of Cart Track Poromboke to Burial Poromboke. He also sought a permission to take immediate steps to prevent any illegal burial/cremation in RS.No.621/3 and RS.No.628/8 of the said village.

6. Pending the writ petition, 10 individuals filed an application to implead themselves. According to them, there exists a graveyard in RS.No.621/3 and RS.No.628/8 from time immemorial. They pleaded that there is no other graveyard in Thiruvengadam Palayam Village and that, it has been used by persons belonging to several communities. They stated that several of their ancestors and their family members as well as others belonging to the village have been buried or cremated in the said graveyard and that, last rites and rituals are conducted in the very place. In addition, they pleaded yearly rituals are conducted at the respective burial sites.

7. They pleaded that sometime in the second week of August 2025, certain persons, motivated by mischievous intention and claiming ownership of lands in the vicinity, had unlawfully and illegally trespassed into the graveyard and cleared the trees, tombstones, headstones, gravestones etc., placed therein. They did so using Bulldozer and other earth moving machineries.

8. On hearing about this development, they rushed to th

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