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) 626

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, C.KUMARAPPAN, JJ.
Shanmugha Arts, Science Technology & Research Academy (SASTRA) Deemed University, Thirumalaisamudram – Petitioner 
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by its secretary to Government, Revenue Department – Respondent
W.P. Nos.6989 and 6993 of 2022 and W.M.P. Nos.7019 and 7025 of 2022
Decided On : 09-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. G. Rajagopalan, Senior Counsel For M/s. G.R. Associates
For the Respondents:Mr. P.S. Raman, Advocate General Assisted by Mr. D. Ravichander Spl. Govt. Pleader.

Encroachers cannot claim rights over public lands designated for governmental purposes; repeated litigations on this issue are discouraged to prevent court congestion.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 - Eviction of encroachers from Government land - Petitioners challenged the Government Orders related to eviction and assignment of land - Issues reached finality, with earlier decisions upheld by the Supreme Court - Encroachment of land allocated for a Prison hampers public projects. (Paras 1, 7, 10)

(B) Legal Principle - Public lands are meant for public use and encroachers cannot claim rights over such lands; re-litigation on settled issues serves to prolong legal processes unnecessarily. (Paras 8, 10)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners have continuously encroached upon Government land for 30 years; various legal avenues exhausted on previous occasions led to the Government’s decision to evict due to encroachment on land needed for public purposes. (Paras 3.1, 6)

Findings of Court:
Numerous litigations have persisted without establishing a legal ground for assignment of the encroached land to the petitioners; Government orders for eviction affirmed by the court. (Paras 9, 10)

Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to relief regarding eviction and land assignment; assessment of re-litigated claims on their merit. (Paras 4, 6)

Ratio Decidendi: The consistent judicial affirmation of eviction and rejections of land assignment requests highlight that encroachment on public land cannot be sanctioned; public rights must prevail over private claims. (Paras 7, 10)

Result: Writ Petitions dismissed, eviction mandated within four weeks.

Table of Content
1. background of the case and parties involved. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioners' arguments against government decisions. (Para 4 , 5)
3. government's defense against re-litigation. (Para 6)
4. observations on re-litigation and public policy. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
5. final decision on eviction notice enforcement. (Para 10)

ORDER :

S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.

Present Writ Petitions are third round of litigations by the petitioners. Longevity of these re-litigations is about 30 years. Issues are already adjudicated and reached finality upto the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Thus, it would suffice to consider the correctness of the impugned Government Orders passed, reiterating the earlier decisions to evict the encroachers from the Government land, allotted for construction of a Prison.

2. W.P.No.6989 of 2022 has been instituted, challenging G.O.Ms.No.84 (Revenue and Disaster Management Department Land Decisions NM 6-2 Division) dated 23.02.2022. W.P.No.6993 of 2022 has been filed, challenging the consequential Eviction Notice issued by the Tahsildar, Thanjavur dated 25.02.2022 in R.C.No.19205/2003/B5. Further directions are sought for to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 20.09.2018 and on subsequent dates.

History of the Case:

3.1. The petitioners have encroached upon the Government land measuring about [12.70.50 Hectares (31.37 Acres)], situated in R.S.Nos.140, 141, 148 and others in Thirumalaisamuthiram Village, Thanjavur Taluk, Thanjavur District in the year 1985. The said Government land was allotted to the Prison Department of Government of Tamil Nadu for establishing an Open Air Jail. On account of encroachment made by the petitioner University, the Prison Department was unable to develop Open Air Jail in the allotted land.

3.2. Eviction proceedings had been initiated by the jurisdictional Tahsildar, Thanjavur under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act , 1905 (in short ‘Act, 1905’). Final Notice under Section 6 was issued, following the judgments delivered in W.P.Nos.14718 and 14719 of 1998 dated 13.07.1998. Opportunities were provided to the petitioner University for voluntary eviction of the superstructure made by the petitioner in Government lands. Challenging the notice issued under Section 6 of the Act, W.P.Nos.9287 and 9292 of 1999 were filed and the said Writ Petitions were dismissed, granting liberty to the petitioner University to file statutory appeals under Section 10 of the Act, 1905. Petitioner filed statutory appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thanjavur on 28.06.1999, which was dismissed vide order dated 15.10.1999. The said order was taken by way of Review Petition before the District Revenue Officer, Thanjavur on 18.11.1999. The matter was remitted back to the Tahsildar, Thanjavur for fresh enquiry on 03.01.2000. After conducting due enquiry, the Tahsildar dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner University. Again, the petitioner University filed an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thanjavur, which was dismissed on 26.06.2000. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a Review Petition before the District Revenue Officer, Thanjavur, which was also dismissed on 26.12.2000 under the provisions of the Act, 1905.

3.3. A second review before the Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Administration, Chennai was filed and an interim order was passed. Meanwhile, the Writ Petitioner filed a petition to the Government for assignment of encroached land. Government rejected the request in its Letter dated 19.12.2002 and ordered for eviction of encroachments. Lease rent was also ordered to be collected for the period of encroachment. The Revision Petition filed before the Commissioner of Land Administration was dismissed on 01.03.2004.

3.4. Pertinently, beyond the statutory frame work, appeals, review after reviews were entertained and all the petitions were dismissed at various levels. Finally, challenging the order of the Commissioner of Land Administration,

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