Writ petitions challenging governmental actions require evidence, and asserting frivolity leads to cost imposition against the petitioner.

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

The proceedings of the Assistant Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, Aruppukkottai addressed to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vide letter dated 07.05.2025 is under challenge in this Writ Petition.

2.The petitioner is the owner of the land in Old S.No.46/10, New S.No.46/10 at Karisalkulam Taluk, Kariapatti Taluk, adjacent to the Madurai to Thoothukudi National Highway. He constructed a house and commercial building comprising two shops. The authorities competent, during survey on National Highway, had found that the petitioner has put up unauthorized constructions by encroaching highways land. Therefore, enforcement actions were initiated and encroachments were removed by the highways authorities by passing an order. The petitioner filed W.P.(MD)No.24036 of 2024, challenging the order dated 03.09.2024 passed by the highways authority for removal of encroachment. This Court considered the issues and imposed cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) on the Highways Department for non-issuance of show cause notice. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1, 2, 4 to 6 would submit that the said cost of Rs.10,000/- has already been paid to the petitioner. Further, a direction was also issued that if the construction is found to be in accordance with the building plan permission and the highways lands are not encroached upon by the petitioner, then the construction is to be restored along with cost of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) in favour of the petitioner.

3.Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, vide order dated

21.10.2024 made in W.P.(MD)No.24036 of 2024, the Revenue Tashildar deputed a qualified Surveyor to measure the property of the petitioner as well as highways and submit a report. The Surveyor has also submitted his report, wherein he has clearly stated that the petitioner had encroached upon the highways land and accordingly, the said position was informed by the Assistant Divisional Engineer, Aruppukkottai to the learned counsel for the petitioner, who sent notice to the highways authorities.

4.The impugned reply reveals that the Surveyor in his report has clearly stated that the petitioner encroached upon the highways land and put up unauthorized construction, which was already demolished. Despite the said fact, the present Writ Petition came to be instituted, which is, in the opinion of this Court, frivolous and vexatious. When the petitioner was well informed about the encroachment of highways land and unauthorized construction and the order of this Court passed earlier, he has chosen to file this Writ Petition only with an idea to claim a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and for restoration of the unauthorized construction and thus, we are not inclined to entertain this Writ Petition. Since this Writ Petition is treated as vexatious litigation, we are inclined to direct the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) towards cost. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- to the Assistant Divisional Engineer, Aruppukkottai, within a period of ten (10) days from today (30.07.2025).

5.With the above observation and direction, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.