Arumugam v. The Tahsildar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH Arumugam .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Tahsildar, Kilpannatur Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District.

2.The Head Surveyor, Survey and Settlement Department, Thiruvannamalai District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Vettavalam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

4.A.Anbalagan .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to survey and demarcate the boundaries of the petitioner's property comprised in Old Survey No.215/10, New Survey No.506/B, measuring from 9 feet East to West and 90 feet from South to North, situated in Vettavalam Village, Kilpennathur Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District, within a reasonable time frame and grant Police protection in order to 1/5

carry out the survey and demarcation of the subject property. For Petitioner :

Mr.D.Murugan For RR 1 & 2 :

Mr.P.Sathish Additional Government Pleader For R3 :

Mr.V.J.Priyadarsana Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed for the issue of writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to conduct a survey and demarcate the boundaries with respect to the subject property based on the application submitted by the petitioner.

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Pleader for respondents 1 & 2 and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the 3rd respondent.

3.It is seen from records that already the 4th respondent approached this Court and filed writ petition in W.P.No.23695 of 2023 and this Court passed an order dated 11.08.2023 and based on the same, a survey was conducted.

2/5

4.When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 & 2 and the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the 3rd respondent submitted that the survey has already been conducted in the subject property. The main grievance that has been expressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in the name of conducting a survey, a portion of the property belonging to the petitioner has also been fenced and therefore the truth will come out only if a re-survey is conducted.

5.In the considered view of this Court, the dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent cannot be resolved by conducting repeated surveys. It will be more appropriate if the parties approach the competent Civil Court and seek for the appropriate relief. Unless and otherwise a Court direction is issued and a survey is conducted and based on the same the Court passes an order / judgment, the dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent will not come to an end. Therefore, instead of the parties wasting their time before the revenue authorities, must go before the Civil Court and agitate this. Except giving this clarification, no further orders can be passed in this writ petition. 3/5

6.In the result, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

28.03.2025 krk Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No : Yes / No To 1.The Tahsildar, Kilpannatur Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District.

2.The Head Surveyor, Survey and Settlement Department, Thiruvannamalai District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Vettavalam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

4/5

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

krk 28.03.2025 5/5