BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 30.03.2026 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY V.Indhrani ... Petitioner Vs

1. The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

2. The Tahsildar, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

3. The Revenue Inspector / Village Administrative Officer, Ettiyathali Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

4. Amalraj ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the official respondents 1 to 3 to survey the petitioner's land situated at Survey No. 32/101 in Ettiyathali Village, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai District, to fix the boundaries as per the settlement Patta, to permit the petitioner to erect fencing around the property, to direct the official respondents to pay compensation for the damages caused by the unlawful demolition, and to permanently forbear the respondents from interfering with or disturbing the petitioners peaceful possession without following the due process of law.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Parthiban For R-1 to R-3 : Mr.D.Gandhiraj Special Government Pleader

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the official respondents 1 to 3 to survey the petitioner's land situated at Survey No. 32/101 in Ettiyathali Village, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai District, to fix the boundaries as per the settlement Patta, to permit the petitioner to erect fencing around the property, to direct the official respondents to pay compensation for the damages caused by the unlawful demolition, and to permanently forbear the respondents from interfering with or disturbing the petitioners peaceful possession without following the due process of law, 2. It is an admitted fact that, by proceedings dated 24.12.1997 in File Reference No.1374/97/A4, an assignment patta was granted in favour of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, he has been in possession and enjoyment of the property for the past 30 years without any disturbance. The revenue records also stand in the name of the petitioner and Patta No.237 has been issued in favour of the petitioner as Ryotwari Manai. The petitioner further submitted that there are errors in the Field Measurement Book (FMB) relating to Survey No.32/101 and the said errors have to be rectified. The petitioner has paid all statutory taxes up to the year 2025. While the petitioner was in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property, the respondents without issuing any notice allegedly demolished and removed the petitioner’s superstructure. Hence, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

3. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents

1 to 3 submitted that that one Indhrani owned two houses, and that there existed a pathway between the said houses. However, she has put up construction by enclosing the pathway. Aggrieved by such encroachment, a Writ Petition in W.P.(MD) Nos.11517 of 2024 and 22805 of 2024 were filed and both the writ petitions were disposed of by order dated 27.09.2024. Thereafter, the respondents initiated action under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, notices were issued, proceedings were conducted and orders were passed. Subsequently, the encroachment was removed. Hence, the petitioner cannot claim any compensation.

4. The contention of the petitioner is that the proceedings referred to by the respondents pertain only to one Kavitha and do not relate to V.Indhrani, V.Shanmuganathan, or V.Ramu. Therefore, the said proceedings cannot be applicable to the petitioner. However, the petitioner is restricting the prayer regarding the survey and seeking liberty to file a suit regarding the demolition and compensation.

5. In view of the above, the second respondent / Tahsildar is directed to conduct a survey in respect of the petitioner’s property in accordance with the settlement patta, demarcate the land, and fix the four boundaries. As far as the p