##PAGE1##

WA No. 235 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR

AND

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI

WA No. 235 of 2026

and CMP Nos. 2085 & 2087 of 2026

C.Madesh,

S/o.Chinnasami

..Appellant

Vs

1. The District Collector,

Krishnagiri District,

Office of the Collectorate,

Krishnagiri.

2. The District Revenue Officer,

Krishnagiri District,

Office of the Collectorate,

Krishnagiri.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer,

Krishnagiri District,

Office of the Collectorate,

Krishnagiri.

4. The Tahsildar,

Pochampalli Taluk,

Krishnagiri District.

5. The Block Development Officer,

Village Panchayat,

__________

Page1 of 11

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/03/2026 06:14:10 pm )

WA No. 235 of 2026

Bargur Panchayat Union,

Bargur, Krishnagiri District.

6. The Village Panchayat President,

Veppalampatti Village,

Pochampalli Taluk,

Krishngiri District. – 635 206.

..Respondent(s)

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside

the Order passed by this Court made in W.P.No. 18566 of 2025 dated17-10-

2025 and allow this Writ Appeal and thus render justice

For Appellant : Mr. A.Tamilarasan

For Respondents : Mr.C.Gauthamaraj,

Government Advocate

Judgment

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.Suresh Kumar J.)

This intra-court appeal has been directed against the order dated

17.10.2025 made in W.P.No.18566 of 2025.

2. The present appellant was the writ petitioner, who claims to be one of

the villager of Thoppadi Kuppam Colony, Santhur Post, Pochampalli Taluk,

Krishnagiri District.

3. There are two hamlets viz., Veppalamapatti Adi Dravidar Kudi irupu

and Thoppadi Kuppam Adi Dravidar Kudi irupu. These people requested the

authorities concerned for the exclusive allotment of burial ground in any

poromboke land.

__________

Page2 of 11

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/03/2026 06:14:10 pm )

WA No. 235 of 2026

4. Already in S.No.678 of the said Village classified as ‘Thoppu

poromboke’ which land belongs to the Government and is being used as a burial

ground, where atleast 10 bodies have already been buried, where only two

tamarind trees and 2 or 3 coconut trees alone are standing. Apart from that,

absolutely the land is not being used for any other purpose.

5. Therefore, in order to make allotment of burial ground to these hamlet

people separately as both of them belong to two different hamlets, the

authorities concerned of the District Administration as well as the Taluk and the

Panchayat Union administration have come forward to sub-divide the land at

S.No.678 into three parts, as S.Nos.678/1, 678/2 and 678/3.

6. The land comprised in S.No.678/1 has been allotted as burial ground

for Veppalampatti Adi Dravidar Kudi irupu. Likewise, the sub-division

S.No.678/2 has been allotted as burial ground for Thoppadi Kuppam Adi

Dravidar and the remaining land i.e., S.No.678/3 has been classified as ‘Pathai’.

7. The aforesaid move on the part of the District/Taluk authorities as well

as Village Panchayat has been questioned by the writ petitioner on the ground

that the writ petitioner is having agricultural land very adjacent to the land in

question, which is now been allotted as a burial ground and within the

objectionable limit of 90 meters, there is a human habitation and also there is a

__________

Page3 of 11

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/03/2026 06:14:10 pm )

WA No. 235 of 2026

drinking water source for the entire village people in the nearby locality, which

would get affected because of the proposed burial ground. These are all the

reasons or the ground, under which, the move on the part of the authorities

concerned to allot these two burial grounds as stated supra was opposed.

8. Therefore, he had made a request to the District Collector to stop

allotting the land for burial grounds to these two hamlets, which was considered

and turned out by the 1^st respondent District Collector through his proceedings

dated 25.01.2025. The said proceedings was under challenge