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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 57857

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, A.D.MARIA CLETE, JJ
K.Guruvammal – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector – Respondent
W.P.(MD) Nos.17265 & 17267 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.D.Nallathambi
For the Respondents: Mr.M.Sarangan, Mr.K.K.Kannan

Judicial review cannot resolve civil rights disputes; due process must be followed for eviction of encroachments.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998 - Section 128 - Petition for writ of certiorarified mandamus against eviction notices issued for road encroachment - Court upheld the removal of encroachments and noted that due process was followed by the authorities. (Paras 3, 4, 6, 7, 9)

(B) Judicial Review - Writ jurisdiction cannot adjudicate civil rights pertaining to property disputes.

Table of Content
1. notice of eviction taken on record. (Para 1 , 2)
2. authority must ensure public road availability. (Para 4 , 6)
3. final notices follow proper procedures. (Para 5)
4. adjudication of property disputes reserved for civil courts. (Para 7 , 8)

[Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.]

Mr.M.Sarangan, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the first respondent and Mr.K.K.Kannan, learned Standing Counsel, takes notice for the second respondent.

2. With the consent of both sides, these writ petitions are taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself.

3. The final notices for removal of encroachments dated

28.04.2025, issued by the second respondent, under Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act , 1998, are under assail in the writ on hand.

4. Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act , 1998, reads as under:

“128.Power to remove encroachment from public place.-(1) The Commissioner may,-

(a)remove without any notice any movable temporary structure, enclosure, stall, booth, any article whatsoever hawked, exposed or displayed for sale or any other thing whatsoever by way of encroaching street or public place or the land belonging to or vested with the municipality within the municipal limit;

[for the expression 'street or public place or the land' the expression 'street, public place, water body, tank, other water resources or any land' substituted vide Act, 25/2024]

(b)remove any immovable structure whether permanent or of temporary nature encroaching the street or public place or the land belonging to or vested with the municipality within the municipal limit, after issuing a show cause notice for such removal, returnable with a period of seven days from the date of receipt thereof:

[(i) for the expression 'street or public place or the land', the expression 'street, public place, water body, tank, other water resources or any land'

(ii) for the expression 'seven days', the expression 'fifteen days', substituted vide Act 25/2024]

Provided that the Commissioner shall consider any representation received within the time limit, before passing final orders.

(2)Whoever makes any encroachment in any land or space (not being private property) in any public street or any land belonging to or vested with the municipality within the municipal limit, shall on conviction be punished with imprisonment which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to three years and with fine which may extend to fifty thousand rupees.

Provided that the Court may for any adequate or special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than one year.

[for the expression 'any public street or any land', the expression 'any public street, water body, tank, other water resources or any land' substituted vide Act

25/2024]”

5. By following the procedures as contemplated under the act and rules, a survey was already conducted to identify the road encroachments. The survey was conducted in pursuance of the directions issued by this Court vide order dated 28.01.2025 in W.P.(MD) No.2219 of 2025. Based on the survey report, the road encroachments are identified by the authorities of Madurai Corporation. Secondly, a notice, under Section 128 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act , 1998, was issued on 02.04.2025. After affording an opportunity to the petitioners to submit their explanations / defence statement, the impugned final notices for removal of encroachments have been issued by the second respondent.

6. Since the procedures, as contemplated under the act and rules, have been followed for removal of road encroachments, this Court do not find any infirmity in the impugned final notices issued by the second respondent. Thus, the encroachers are expected to vacate from the encroached portions of the road. In the event of not vacating the encroached portions, the authorities competent are duty bound to remove the encroachments in accordance wit

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