Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.JAYACHANDRAN, K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
A. Natarajan – Appellant
Versus
District Collector, Ramanathapuram – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners claim inadequate opportunity before orders. (Para 2) |
| 2. arguments on representation and notice procedures. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court affirms adherence to procedural requirements. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. writ petitions dismissed; no merit found. (Para 9) |
ORDER :
G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
Mr.D.Sasi Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents.
2. Being aggrieved by the orders, dated 03.11.2025, passed by the third respondent, under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, directing the petitioners herein to remove the encroachments made by them in the subject land, these writ petitions have been filed, on the ground that adequate opportunity was not given to them before passing the impugned orders.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that when the villagers opposed the illegal business run by a bootlegger, she submitted a representation to the respondents seeking to remove the encroachments made in the subject land and since the said representation was not considered by the respondents, she filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.(MD) No. 4198 of 2025 seeking a direction to the respondents to remo
The court upheld the validity of removal orders under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, confirming that proper procedure was followed in providing notice and opportunity for the petitioners to re....
Authorities must wait for the reply under Section 7 before passing an order under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905.
Civil disputes involving encroachments should be resolved through appropriate civil courts as they require pleadings and evidence, not through writ jurisdiction under Article 226.
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.
Eviction notice under Section 7 requires reply consideration and hearing before final action; premature writ interference declined.
Eviction orders under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act must be accompanied by a reasoned explanation and proper verification of facts, failing which they are deemed invalid.
The court emphasized the need to protect the petitioner's interest until the Statutory Appeal is disposed of, considering the nature of the land and the lack of opportunity for a fair hearing.
Eviction orders under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act must be reasoned and adhere to procedural fairness, requiring consideration of objections raised by the alleged encroacher.
Mandamus issued for expeditious removal of encroachments on public Taluk Office land post statutory notices under Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act.
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
