Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, C.KUMARAPPAN, JJ
Ramu – Appellant
Versus
The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o. Revenue Divisional Office, Mayiladuthurai District. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the court examines the validity of issuing notice under the tamil nadu land encroachment act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. clarification on procedural correctness for appeals related to notices under the act. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court directs proper filing of appeal procedures. (Para 6) |
(Order of the Court was made by C.KUMARAPPAN,J.,)
The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned notice dated 21.01.2026 issued by the Tahsildar.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners preferred a Writ Petition in W.P.No.9569 of 2025, wherein the Authorities were restrained to proceed with removal of encroachments until the appeal filed by the petitioners is disposed of. It is the further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that such appeal has not been disposed of. In the mean while, the Authorities have issued present impugned notice. Therefore, said notice is contrary to the orders of the Division Bench. Hence, prayed to interfere with the same.
3. The learned Special Government Pleader would stoutly object the said contentions and would submit that in pursuance of the order made in W.P.No.5675 of 2024 dated 04.03.2024, t
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
