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) 48166

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. Dhandapani, J
Pukalenthi – Appellant
Versus
District Collector – Respondent
W.M.P. No.18454 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S. Ramachandran
For the Respondents: P. Siddarth

State authorities must verify private property boundaries through formal survey and measurement before initiating construction projects on land claimed by individuals.

Headnote:The petitioners challenged the proposed road construction by municipal authorities on their private land, citing ownership under a registered sale deed. They invoked Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a Writ of Mandamus to prevent encroachment. The core issue was whether the respondents could proceed with the construction without first verifying the boundary and ownership of the subject land through a formal survey. The court determined that the authorities must verify ownership and delineate the property boundaries before initiating infrastructure projects, emphasizing the principle of administrative fairness and protection of private property rights. The writ petition was disposed of with directions for the authorities to conduct a survey and measurement of the property within two weeks, during which period all road construction activities on the subject land were stayed.

Table of Content
1. factual basis of property dispute regarding potential encroachment. (Para 1 , 2)
2. parties' request for administrative survey of disputed land. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. court mandate for land survey prior to infrastructure development. (Para 6 , 7)

ORDER

The petitioners have filed this writ petition alleging that the respondents are attempting to lay a road through their land comprised in Survey No.288, Chennappanayakanpalayam Village, Cuddalore Taluk and District, measuring an extent of 1.21 ares.

2. It is stated that the petitioners purchased the subject property under a registered Sale Deed dated 20.12.1990 and their names have been mutated in the revenue records. Thus, the petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of the property and have raised cashew trees therein. It is the apprehension of the petitioners that the 2nd respondent is proposing to lay a road through the petitioners' land, thereby they submitted various representations, lastly dated 24.03.2026 seeking measurement of the property as well to drop the proposal of road laying the private land belonging to the petitioners. But the same evoked no response from the respondents. Hence, this writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that it would suffice, if this Court issues directions to the respondents to consider the petitioners representations and pass appropriate orders.

4. Replying to the aforesaid submission, learned Government Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that no such representation is pending before the respondents for consideration. However, the petitioners may be directed to submit a copy of the said representation to the concerned Taluk Surveyor.

5. Acceding to the said submission, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners will submit an appropriate application before the Taluk Surveyor for measurement of the property and this Court may issue directions to the respondents to consider the same, within a short time. However, he prayed till such time, the respondents may also be directed not to lay road on the property of the petitioners.

6. In view of the fair submissions, this writ petition stands disposed of by issuing the following directions :

i) The petitioners are directed to submit an appropriate application before the 2nd respondent as well as the Taluk Surveyor, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by ventilating the above grievances along with this order copy.

ii) On receipt of such application, the Taluk Surveyor shall conduct survey and measurement of the property after notice to the petitioners and the

2nd respondent and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

iii) Till such exercise is completed, the 2nd respondent shall not lay any road in the subject property of the petitioners. However, it is open to the 2nd respondent to proceed in accordance with law, if the subject land belongs to Government or local body.

7. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

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