Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 25688

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. M. Subramaniam, K. Surender, JJ
P.Vijaya – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector Kallakurichi District – Respondent
W.P. Nos. 11550 and 11554 of 2026

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Sasi.V
For the Respondents: Mr.D.Ravichander, Dr.T.Seenivasan

Authorities must adhere to procedural requirements before initiating eviction actions, ensuring representations are considered as mandated by the applicable statute.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998 - Section 128(1)(b)(2) - Writ Petitions challenging notices for eviction and demolition of properties - The authority must follow due process and consider representations from petitioners before enforcing any removal actions. (Paras 2-3)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - It is imperative that procedural mandates under relevant statutes are adhered to by authorities to ensure fair administrative action.

Facts of the case:
Petitioners contested eviction notices issued to them regarding their residences and businesses, asserting their representations needed to be considered first.

Findings of Court:
The respondents were directed to review the petitioners' representations and only then take enforcement actions relating to alleged encroachments on water bodies.

Issues: The court primarily addressed the necessity for authorities to comply with statutory obligations prior to eviction actions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that due process must be followed, affirming the importance of considering submissions from affected parties before executing eviction orders.

Result: Writ Petitions disposed of with directions to the authority.

Table of Content
1. identification of the parties involved and the basis of the petitions. (Para 2)
2. directives regarding representation consideration before enforcement. (Para 3)
3. order to dispose of petitions without costs. (Para 4)

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

The notices issued under Section 128(1)(b)(2) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998, are under challenge in the present Writ Petitions.

2. Admittedly, the petitioners have submitted their explanations on

25.02.2026, respectively. The grievance of the petitioners is that, before taking a final decision, the authority is attempting to evict the petitioners. It is needless to state that the procedures contemplated under Section 128 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, must be scrupulously followed by the authority. The statute mandates that any representation received within the prescribed time limit shall be considered by the authority or the officer concerned before passing final orders. Thus, the competent authority has to pass the final orders before initiating any enforcement action for the removal of encroachments.

3. In the present case, the petitioners have already submitted their representations. Thus, the respondents are directed to consider the same and pass final orders, and thereafter proceed with enforcement action, if any encroachment is identified in the water body.

4. With the above direction, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 25688

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASS. M. Subramaniam, K. Surender, JJP.Vijaya – AppellantVersusThe District Collector Kallakurichi District – RespondentW.P. Nos. 11550 and 11554 of 2026

Authorities must adhere to procedural requirements before initiating eviction actions, ensuring representations are considered as mandated by the applicable statute.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. M. Subramaniam, K. Surender, JJ
P.Vijaya – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector Kallakurichi District – Respondent
W.P. Nos. 11550 and 11554 of 2026