BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.11.2025 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN W.P.(MD)No.22076 of 2025 R.Senthilkumar ... Petitioner /Vs./

1.The Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

2.The District Collector, O/o.the District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Sub Collector, O/o.the Sub Collector, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.

4.The Tahsildar, Paramakudi Taluk, 5.The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar-II, Paramakudi, 6.Mukkulathor Nalasangam Kamuthakudi, Regn.No.79/2020, No.1/402, Kamuthakudi Village, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Petition - filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents No.2 to 5 to remove the encroachment made by the 6th respondent in S.Nos.592/1, 593/4 situated at Kamuthakudi Village, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District as per the order passed by the 1st respondent in Letter No.T2/10380642/2025, dated 07.05.2025, within the time stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.R.Prithviraj For Respondents : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar (R1 to R5)

Government Pleader Mr.M.Sethu Pandian (R6)

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by C.KUMARAPPAN, J.)

The present writ petition has been filed to issue a writ of mandamus directing the official respondents to remove the encroachment made by the sixth respondent in S.Nos.592/1, 593/4 situated at Kamuthakudi Village, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

2. While looking at the Letter No.T2/10380642/2025, dated

07.05.2025, issued by the first respondent, the same is the order of the first respondent in a revision filed by the writ petitioner. According to the observation therein, the pendency of the civil litigation will have no impact against the Authorities to proceed under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Authorities are not acting as per the directions of the first respondent. But the facts and circumstances of the issue has got a checkered history.

4. Originally, the petitioner has complained about the encroachment by sixth respondent Sangam. In pursuance thereof, the Sub Collector, Paramakudi, has issued the lock and seal notice. Aggrieved with the same, when the sixth respondent herein filed a writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.1899 of 2024, this Court has directed the Authorities to consider the objection raised by the sixth respondent. While the objection of the sixth respondent was under consideration, the present petitioner filed W.P.(MD)No.19908 of 2024 and vide order dated 20.08.2024, the Authorities were directed to proceed under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. As per the directions of this Court, the fourth respondent issued notice under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, vide notice dated 19.09.2024. The said notice was challenged in a writ petition by the sixth respondent in W.P.(MD)No.24034 of 2024, wherein, this Court vide order dated 14.10.2024, set aside the notice under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and directed the Tahsildar, Paramakudi to await the disposal of the appeal filed under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 preferred before the District Collector, Ramanathapuram district / R2. The second respondent has passed order by dismissing the appeal vide order dated 06.03.2025.

5. Aggrieved with the order of the second respondent, both the petitioner and the sixth respondent preferred a revision before the first respondent. Though the petitioner's appeal was disposed of, in respect of the sixth respondent appeal, the first respondent through letter dated

12.06.2025, directed the sixth respondent to file a revision before the appropriate revisional authority as per Section 10(A)(1)(C) of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and such revision is pending.

6. Therefore, this Court is of the view that