The court emphasizes adherence to statutory procedures for the removal of encroachments under the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kamadevan For Respondents : Mr.T.K.Saravanan Government Advocate for R1 to R4 O R D E R [Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.,]

Captioned main 'Writ Petition' {hereinafter 'WP' for the sake of brevity} is the second round of litigation in this Court. The first round was vide W.P.No.14752 of 2024 which came to be disposed of by this Court in and by an order 14.06.2024 reported in Neutral Citation [2024:MHC:2384]

and a scanned reproduction of the same is as follows:

2. Mr.S.Kamadevan, learned counsel on record for writ petitioner, adverting to the above order submits that post above order, R2 activated proceedings and sent a communication dated 05.09.2024 bearing reference Na.Ka.A1/1958/2024 inter alia holding that there is encroachment qua 'land in S.No.278/1A1A admeasuring an extent of 0.03.25 Hectares in Koothur Village, Alathur Taluk, Perambalur District' {hereinafter 'said land' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity}. Thereafter, R4 sought police assistance for removal of encroachment vide proceedings dated 18.11.2024 bearing reference Na.Ka.No.3361/2024/F1. To be noted, this communication is from R4 to jurisdictional Inspector of Police. Thereafter, interestingly and intriguingly, R4 has sent a communication to R2 being communication dated 23.12.2024 bearing reference Na.Ka.No.3361/2024/F1 and a scanned reproduction of the same is as follows:

3. The concluding paragraph shows that R4 has written that the Municipality would join with District Monitoring Committee and remove the encroachment. This is clearly unacceptable as Monitoring Committee is an adjudicating entity. Therefore, we are of the view that further proceedings should be under the supervision of R1.

4. Be that as it may, after the aforesaid 23.12.2024 proceedings, jurisdictional Revenue Divisional Officer i.e., R2 has written to R4 on 26.12.2024 vide letter bearing reference Na.Ka.A1/1958/2024 saying that encroachment needs to be removed.

5. Issue notice to official respondents.

6. Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Government Advocate accepts notice for R1 to R4.

7. Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned State Counsel, on instructions, submits that removal of encroachment proceedings will mean that R5 to R9 and / or any other encroachers, if any, have to be show caused vide Section 128(1)(b) of ' The Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998 (Act 9 of 1999)' (hereinafter 'TNULB Act' for the sake of convenience and clarity) and if they send any representation, R4 has to pass final orders. Learned State Counsel, on instructions, submits that notice under Section 128(1)(b) of TNULB Act will be issued within a fortnight from today i.e., by 06.02.2025, seven days notice therefrom would be 13.02.2025 and depending on representation, if any, exercise will be completed and concluded one way or the other by 27.02.2025. This submission is recorded.

8. In the light of the narrative thus far, we are of the considered view that it would be appropriate to record the stated position of learned State counsel and dispose of the captioned WP with observation / directive that official respondents, more particularly R4 under the supervision of R1 shall do well to conclude the exercise in the aforesaid manner as expeditiously as the official business would permit but in any event on or before 27.02.2025.

9. We are requisitioning a compliance report from R1.

Captioned WP disposed of in the aforesaid manner. There shall be no order as to costs.

(M.S.,J.) (K.R.S.,J.)

23.01.2025 Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order mk P.S. I: Upload forthwith P.S.II : All concerned including the Registry of Madras High Court to act forthwith on the uploaded soft copy of this proceedings as uploaded in the official website of this Court. To be noted, the soft copies uploaded in the o