SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 29490

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, K. SURENDER, JJ
A.Rajagopal – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector Salem – Respondent
W.P.No.12635 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.A.Saravanan
For the Respondents: Mr.T.Arun Kumar, Mr.R.Kumaravel

The court emphasized the right to appeal under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, directing that appeals be entertained irrespective of limitation for fair resolution.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 - Section 6 and Section 10 - Writ Petition for Mandamus sought to restrain respondents from proceeding with a notice while appeal was pending - The petitioner submitted a representation prior to the notice and sought to ensure the appeal is addressed timely. (Paras 1-4)

(B) Claim of appeal - Acknowledging the right to appeal, the court directed the District Collector to entertain such appeal without regard to the period of limitation. (Para 3)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged a notice issued under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act while seeking timely resolution of an appeal.

Findings of Court:
The court granted liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal, directing it to be decided on merits without reference to limitation.

Issues: The primary issue was ensuring the petitioner’s appeal was processed in relation to the notice under the 1905 Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of allowing the petitioner to pursue their appeal and ensuring a fair resolution as per law.

Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks relief against notices under the 1905 act. (Para 1 , 2)
2. government argues appeal not properly filed. (Para 3)

O R D E R

[Made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J., The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the respondents not to take any proceedings in furtherance of the notice issued under Section 6 of “the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (Tamil Nadu Act III of 1905)” {hereinafter “1905 Act” for the sake of brevity}

by the 4th respondent dated 24.06.2025 and the consequential notice issued by the 5th respondent in Na.Ka.No.1870/2025/A2 dated 12.01.2026, until the disposal of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 10 of the 1905 Act before the 1st respondent on 25.02.2026.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that pursuant to the show cause notice issued under Section 7 of the 1905 Act, the petitioner submitted a representation and a final decision under Section 6 came to be issued. Challenging the said notice, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the District Revenue Officer, Salem. The petitioner, now seeks a direction for the disposal of the said appeal.

3. The learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that the appeal under Section 10 of the 1905 Act would lie before the District Collector, however, the petitioner has not preferred it before the competent authority.

4. Granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal under Section

10 of the 1905 Act, before the District Collector, the present writ petition stands disposed of. In the event of the petitioner preferring such an appeal, the District Collector shall entertain the same without reference to the period of limitation and decide the issue on merits and in accordance with law.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top