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) 73943

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice R. SURESH KUMAR
DHANALAKSHMI – Appellant
Versus
GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24.10.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR W.P.No.39853 of 2025 Dhanalakshmi .. Petitioner Vs.

1. Government of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary to Government Land Administration Department Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

2. The District Collector Tiruvallur Collector's Office Tiruvallur District.

3. The Tahsildar Thiruttani Town and Taluk Thiruvallur District – 631 209.

4. Public Works Department Rep. by its Junior Engineer (Water Irrigation Department (Ku/Po))

Irrigation Division, Thiruttani. .. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records of the fourth respondent in their proceedings vide K.No.D16/JE/Thiruttani/2025 dated 17.10.2025 to remove the alleged encroachment by the petitioner in Survey No.93/3 on 23.10.2025 at about 10 a.m. or any later date and quash the same and consequently forbearing the 3rd and 4th respondents from in anyway interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the house and office at S.No.93/3 to an extent of 0.05 cents at No.211A, Sai Baba Nagar, Chittor Road, Amirthapuram, Thiruttani, Thiruvallur District – 631 209, particularly by evicting the petitioner from the above said premises pending final determination of the petitioner's revision petition dated 10.10.2025 under Section 10(1)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, by the first respondent.

For the Petitioner : Mr.D.S.Rajasekaran For the Respondents : Mr.T.Chezhiyan Additional Government Pleader ORDER (Order of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)

The prayer sought herein is for a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records of the fourth respondent in proceedings vide K.No.D16/JE/Thiruttani/2025 dated 17.10.2025, to remove the alleged encroachment by the petitioner in Survey No.93/3 on 23.10.2025 at about 10 a.m. or any later date and quash the same and consequently, forbear respondents 3 and 4 from in anyway interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the house and office at S.No.93/3 to an extent of 0.05 cents at No.211A, Sai Baba Nagar, Chittor Road, Amirthapuram, Thiruttani, Thiruvallur District – 631 209, particularly by evicting the petitioner from the above said premises, pending final determination of the petitioner's revision petition dated 10.10.2025 under Section 10(1)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 19051, by the first respondent.

1 In short, hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1905”

2. In respect of the land in Survey No.93/3, Stream Poromboke Land, Amirthapuram Village, it is the contention of the Revenue Authorities as well as the Department of Water Resources of the Government of Tamil Nadu that, the land is a stream poromboke, that is a waterbody, where, allegedly, the present petitioner has encroached upon the property. Therefore, in order to remove such encroachment, already proceedings have been initiated under the provisions of the Act of 1905, which, ultimately culminated in an order of rejection in an appeal filed by the petitioner by the second respondent/District Collector.

3. In view of the dismissal of the appeal filed under Section 10 of the Act of 1905 filed by the petitioner, now, the fourth respondent, that is the Water Resources Department of the State Government, through its Junior Engineer, Irrigation Section, Tiruttani, has issued proceedings dated 17.10.2025 by fixing the date as 23.10.2025 for removal of such alleged encroachment against the petitioner. That is the order impugned in the present writ petition.

4. Heard Mr.D.S.Rajasekaran, learned counsel for the petitioner, who would submit that, as against the order passed by the District Collector under Section 10 of the Act of 1905 in the appeal filed by the petitioner, a revision has been filed under Section 10(1)(c) of the Act of 1905 before the first respon

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