IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 01-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM

AND

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

WP No. 38617 of 2025

and

WMP Nos.43176 & 43178 of 2025

M.Jebaraj

Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Commissioner

Panchayat Union, Hosur.

2.The Commissioner

Hosur City Municipal Corporation,

Hosur.

3.The Block Development Officer

Panchayat Union, Hosur.

4.The Assistant Director

District Land Survey Department,

Krishnagiri. 5.Tahsildar

Hosur, Krishnagiri.

Respondent(s)

PRAYER:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, Ccalling for the records of the impugned notice of the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka. No.3275/

2025/A2 dated 03.10.2025 and the impugned notices of the 1st respondent in Na.Ka. NO. 4036/ 2021/A2 dated 04.08.2025 and 19.08.2025 and quash the same and further direct the 1st respondent to consider petitioner reply dated 11.08.2025 and pass fresh orders after affording opportunity of hearing.

For Petitioner(s): M.R.Dhalapathy Vignesh Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr.T.Arunkumar AGP For R1 and R3 to T5.

Mr.T.Balaji, Standing Counsel for R2.

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

The writ on hand has been instituted to assail the notice dated

21.08.2025 issued under Section 131(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that documents along with the explanations are submitted before the Commissioner, Panchayat Union, for consideration and without considering the said document, actions are initiated for removal of alleged encroachments. The petitioner was directed to remove the encroachments within 15 days and report the same to the Office of the Commissioner, Panchayat Union, as per the notice, failing which the Commissioner will be constrained to initiate action by submitting a report to the Revenue Tahsildar to invoke the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905.

3.Such notice issued under Section 131(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, would not provide any cause for institution of a writ proceeding. In the present case, the petitioner has already submitted a representation to the Commissioner, Panchayat Union, for consideration. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that non-consideration of the documents by the Commissioner, Panchayat Union, resulted in filing of the present writ petition.

4.The learned Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the respondents, would oppose by stating that notice has been issued under Section 131(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act, 1994. The scheme of the Act confers power on the Commissioner or the Executive Authority to secure the removal of encroachments within such time as may be specified under the Act and therefore, the writ petition filed, challenging the notice, is not maintainable.

5.This Court has considered the rival submissions made between the parties. It is necessary to consider the scope of Section 131(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, and the correctness of the procedures followed by the authorities in the present case.

6.Section 131(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, reads as under :

“It shall be the duty of the Village Administrative Officer of every revenue village to report on encroachments on properties vested in Village Panchayats or Panchayat Union Councils to the Executive Authority or the commissioner concerned and to the officer of the Revenue Department, and (it shall be the duty of the Executive Authority or the Commissioner concerned either suo motu or on obtaining a report from the Village Administrative Officer in this regard to institute proceedings under this Act) and secure the removal of the encroachments within such time as may be specified by the Government by general or special order. If the removal of the encroachments has not been secured within the period specified in such order, the officers of the Revenue Department shall institute proce