Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 41500
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, CJ, G. Arul Murugan, J
MOHAN RAMASAMY – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
W.P.No.4403 of 2026
Important Points
Subject
Land Law - Encroachment Removal
Act Referred
Headnote
Issues: Whether a direction should be issued to remove encroachments?
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that once authorities have initiated eviction proceedings, the writ petition can be disposed with directions to expedite the process. The writ petition is disposed of with direction to the second respondent to complete the process within twelve weeks.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. H.Thiyagarajan For Ms. R.Sripriya
For the Respondents: Mr. M.Habeeb Rahman
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks mandamus for water body encroachment removal. (Para 1) |
| 2. eviction proceedings initiated with section 7 notice issued. (Para 2) |
| 3. state counsel reports appropriate action will be taken. (Para 3) |
| 4. petition disposed with direction to complete process within twelve weeks. (Para 4) |
This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to respondents 1 to 3 to remove the encroachments water body in the survey nos 342, 344, 346, 348, 366/1 and 366/6 of the Ezhusempon Village, Kanjannur
2. Second respondent has filed counter affidavit. On perusal of the counter, it is seen that the eviction proceedings have already been initiated and show cause notice under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 has been issued to encroachers granting 15 days’ time to respond.
3. Learned State counsel submits that appropriate action would be taken for removal of encroachments in accordance with law.
4. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to second respondent to complete the process as early as possible, preferably within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
