Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.JAYACHANDRAN, K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
D. Ilanchelian – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by The District Collector, Tiruchir – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. historical context of the disputed land. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. allegations of encroachment and legality of temple construction. (Para 3 , 8) |
| 3. defense claims regarding land and temple legality. (Para 4 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. findings of advocate commissioner on encroachment. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. court's analysis of submitted reports and testimony. (Para 12 , 13 , 15) |
| 6. rationale for decision against enforcing removal. (Para 18) |
| 7. final order disposing of the petition. (Para 19) |
JUDGMENT :
G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
This Public Interest Litigation is by a resident of Thanthai Periyar EVR Nagar, Tiruchy. As per his affidavit, Thanthai Periyar EVR Nagar was promoted by the Srirangam Co-operative Housing Building Society (the 6th respondent) in the year 1974. His father purchased a plot from the said Society and had constructed a house. On the west of this layout, the Madras Trunk Road and to the south, Thiruchi – Villupuram Railway line, runs. During the same period, the 7th respondent viz., K.S.Ganapathy Iyer, promoted his land situated nearby EVR Nagar and named it as 'Ganapathy Nagar'.
2.The grievance of the writ petitioner is that, in the year 2006, 20 feet width Madras Trunk Road running along
The construction of the temple, although encroaching public land, does not currently obstruct public traffic; removal of unauthorized structures will occur only as necessary and according to law.
Government cannot legalize unauthorized encroachment on temple land by rent fixation; must remove and restore.
Court directed consideration of petitioner's representation for encroachment removal after personal hearings for both parties within two months.
The court affirmed the authority's power to issue demolition orders on unauthorized constructions when ownership and permissions are not clearly established.
Failure to take timely action to stop construction may lead to dismissal of review application.
The court emphasizes the prohibition of encroachments on public roads, reaffirming the necessity for maintaining public access and utility.
Court directed compliance with earlier orders to assess encroachments on government land, emphasizing legal ownership.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
