Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR, M.JOTHIRAMAN, JJ
G.Radhika – Appellant
Versus
1.The District Collector, Trichy District, Trichy – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to notice issued under the land encroachment act. (Para 1) |
| 2. consideration of alternative remedy under statutory provisions. (Para 2) |
| 3. dismissal of writ petition based on the availability of the alternative remedy. (Para 3) |
(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned Notice dated 03.04.2025 issued by the third respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the third respondent to issue patta in favour of the petitioner.
2. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4, on instructions, submitted that notices were issued under Section 6 of the Land Encroachment Act for the alleged construction of a toilet in the public land.
3. Considering that an effective alternative remedy is available under Section 10 of the Land Encroachment Act , liberty is granted to the petitioner to file an appeal before the concerned authorities, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, no coercive steps shall be taken by the respondents against the petitioner.
4. In view of the above, this writ petition is
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
