The court emphasized adherence to proper procedures under the Tamil Nadu Survey and Boundaries Act, ruling against unnecessary litigation under Article 226 when proper avenues exist for contesting grievances.

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 14/08/2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI WP (MD). No.22241 of 2025 and WMP(MD) No.17349 of 2025 Rajesh ... Petitioner Vs

1. The District Collector, Theni District, Collectorate Building, Theni.

2. VAO Grievance Committee, Represented by its the Chairperson/

the Personal Assistant to Collector (Land), Collectorate Building, Theni.

3. Thangaraj, Village Administrative Officer, Odaipatti Village, Uthamapalayam Taluk, Theni District.. ... Respondents PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings in E.Ko.No.A6/2737933 (CLR/REV/8725)/2024 dated 28.04.2025 passed by the 2^nd respondent quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to conduct fresh enquiry as per the guidelines issued by this Court in WP(MD) No.13916 of 2019 dated 01.07.2019 and take necessary action against the 3^rd respondent by considering the petitioner's representation dated 22.11.2024. For Petitioner : Mr.J.M.Arvind Pawlraj For Respondents : Mr.SRA.Ramachandran for R1 &R2 Special Government Pleader

ORDER

By consent of both sides, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

2. This writ petition has been filed challenging impugned proceedings in E.Ko.No.A6/2737933 (CLR/REV/8725)/2024 dated 28.04.2025 passed by the 2^nd respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the 2^nd respondent to conduct fresh enquiry as per the guidelines issued by this Court in WP(MD) No.13916 of 2019 dated 01.07.2019 and take necessary action against the 3^rd respondent by considering the petitioner's representation dated 22.11.2024.

3. The facts in nutshell is as follows:

The petitioner had purchased a piece of land for valid consideration. In order to survey the said land, the petitioner approached the Village Administrative Officer, Firka Surveyor, Head Surveyor and the Tahsildar by paying necessary fees. However, the Village Administrative Officer/3^rd respondent had not surveyed the land. Therefore, the petitioner was constrained to issue legal notices to the third respondent and the third respondent refused to receive the same and therefore, the petitioner preferred a representation to the 1^st respondent for constituting VAO Grievance Committee and accordingly, the first respondent constituted the said committee on 06.01.2025 and notice was also sent to the petitioner and the petitioner could not attend the said enquiry conducted on 10.01.2025. In the meantime, the petitioner preferred a consumer complaint against the Additional Director of Land Survey, Tahsildar, Head Surveyor and the Firka Surveyor. The said complaint was entertained and an award for a sum of Rs.30,000/- was passed as compensation apart from Rs.10,000/- as costs. Subsequently, the 2^nd respondent herein issued notice on 27.02.2025 for the enquiry to be conducted on 14.03.2025, which was received by the petitioner on 08.03.2025. Since the petitioner is aggrieved by the appointment of a member in the grievance committee, the petitioner sent a representation to the 1^st respondent for constituting a fresh committee and as such, a committee was constituted and it had conducted enquiry on 24.04.2025. However, not being satisfied with the enquiry conducted, the petitioner requested the conduct of enquiry in a private place, however, since the same was refused, the petitioner sent a representation on 25.04.2025 and the same was rejected. Since the respondents had failed to follow the guidelines framed in WP(MD) No.13916 of 2019 dated 01.07.2019, the petitioner is before this Court with this writ petition.

4. The l