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

MADRAS HIGH COURT
Honourable Mr Justice P. VELMURUGAN
RAMARAJ.N.S – Appellant
Versus
THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND ADMINISTRATION – Respondent
WP(MD)/23170/2021



An enquiry under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, cannot be conducted without giving the petitioner an opportunity to explain his position.

Headnote:

LAND ENCROACHMENT - NOTICE UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE TAMIL NADU LAND ENCROACHMENT ACT, 1905 - SUMMARY

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the notice issued under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, alleging that he had encroached upon a odai poromboke and put up a house and compound wall.

Finding of the Court:

The court directed the petitioner to file his explanation to the impugned notice within two weeks and directed the authorities to consider the same after affording him an opportunity of personal hearing and pass appropriate orders under Section 6.

Issues: Whether the petitioner had encroached upon the odai poromboke and put up a house and compound wall.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner should have been given an opportunity to explain his position before an enquiry was conducted under Section 6 of the Act.

Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the authorities to consider the petitioner's explanation and pass appropriate orders under Section 6.

W.P(MD)No.23170 of 2021

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 04.01.2022

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA

and

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

W.P(MD)No.23170 of 2021

and

WMP(MD)No.19602 of 2021

N.S.Ramaraj

... Petitioner

vs.

1) The Commissioner of Land Administration,

Land Administration Department,

2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,

Chennai.

2) The District Collector,

Virudhunagar District.

3) The Tahsildar,

Office of the Tahsildar,

Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

4) The Sub Registrar,

Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

5) Sub-Registrar,

Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District.

6) The Divisional Engineer,

State Highways,

Pachamadam, Rajapalayam,

Virudhunagar District.

... Respondents

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of

the notice dated 16.12.2021 in Na.Ka.A6/7002/2020 of the 3rd

respondent herein and the proceedings dated 29.11.2021 in

Na.Ka.A6/7002/2020 of the 3rd respondent and to quash the same.

For Petitioner

: Mr.ARL.Sundaresan, Senior Counsel

for M/s.AL.Ganthimathi

For Respondents

: Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandran

Additional Government Pleader

1/3

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

W.P(MD)No.23170 of 2021

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by

PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.)

The writ petition is directed against the notice issued under

Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905

[hereinafter 'the Act' for brevity]. The impugned notice states

that Survey No.1661/1 in Ayankollankondan 2 Village, Rajapalayam

Taluk, is a odai poromboke, in which, the petitioner has encroached

upon and put up a house and raised a compound wall to an extent of

721.82 square meters. Hence, the notice is issued calling upon him

to give explanation as to why he cannot be evicted from the said

premises.

2.

Normally, it is after giving reply by the petitioner in

this regard, an enquiry will be conducted under Section 6 of the

Act. Without resorting to enquiry under Section 6, the order has

been passed. The petitioner without even giving response to the

impugned notice, has rushed to this Court contending that all those

proceedings or documents or circulars referred to in the

proceedings of the Tahsildar, Rajapalayam, dated 29.11.2021 were

not furnished to him and unless they are furnished, he cannot give

a reply. Though the petitioner has stated in his affidavit that it

is his patta land having purchased the same on 20.12.1999, there

are no title deeds furnished in the typedset of papers.

3.

Be that as it may, the petitioner is directed to file his

explanation to the impugned notice within a period of two weeks

from today, to the authorities and the authorities are directed to

consider the same after affording him an opportunity of personal

hearing, pass appropriate orders under Section 6. Till such time

the enquiry is completed, the possession of the petitioner need not

be disturbed.

4.

With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed

of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is

closed.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar (CS-II)

// True Copy //

/ /2022

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

bala

2/3

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

W.P(MD)No.23170 of 2021

To

1) The Commissioner of Land Administration,

Land Administration Department,

2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,

Chennai.

2) The District Collector,

Virudhunagar District.

3) The Tahsildar,

Office of the Tahsildar,

Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

4) The Sub Registrar,

Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

5) Sub-Registrar,

Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District.

6) The Divisional Engineer,

State Highways,

Pachamadam, Rajapalayam,

Virudhunagar District.

+1 CC to M/s.AL.GANTHIMATHI, Advocate ( SR-238[F] dated

04/01/2022 )

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-360[F] dated 05/01/2

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