Nagaraj v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE Nagaraj ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The District Collector District collector office Krishnagiri.

2. The Thasildar Taluk Office, Denkanikottai.

3. The Block Development officer Block Development office Kelamangalam Krishnagiri District

4. Rajeswari ..Respondent(s) Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 1-3 to remove the fencing/obstruction made by the 4th respondent in S.No.37/2B1B to an extent of 0.06.5 cents of land Thottamettarai village and Karukanahalli Revenue village, Denkanikotta Taluk, Krishnagiri District based on the representation dated 19.01.2026.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.C.Krishnan For Respondent(s):

Mrs.C.Meera Arumugam, AGP (R1 & R2) Mr.Venkataseshaiya, GA, for R3

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to remove the fencing/obstruction alleged to have been put up by the fourth respondent in the property morefully disclosed in the prayer to this writ petition, based on the petitioner's representation dated 19.01.2026, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that the fourth respondent has illegally put up a fencing in the subject property, which is obstructing free movement of the petitioner and other villagers. The petitioner had given a representation on 19.01.2026 to the official respondents requesting them to remove the fencing/obstruction put up by the fourth respondent in the subject property.

3. Mrs.C.Meera Arumugam, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2. Since no adverse orders are passed against the fourth respondent, notice to the fourth respondent in this writ petition is dispensed with by this Court.

4. Mr.Venkataseshaya, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the third respondent, and on instructions, he submits that pursuant to the representation given by the petitioner, an enquiry is being conducted and it is under process.

5. In view of the same, no prejudice will be caused to the official respondents, if the aforesaid representation of the petitioner is considered, on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the objections from the fourth respondent, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the third respondent to pass final orders, on merits and in accordance with law, on the petitioner's representation dated 19.01.2026 seeking for removal of the alleged fencing put up by the fourth respondent in the subject property, after hearing the objections of the fourth respondent, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the aforesaid representation of the petitioner. No Costs. 30-03-2026 RKM To

1. The District Collector Krishnagiri

2. The Thasildar Taluk Office,

3. Denkanikottai.

4. The Block Development officer Kelamangalam Krishnagiri District

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

RKM 30-03-2026