A.K.Geetha v. The Revenue Divisional Office

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 18.08.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR W.P. No.18038 of 2025 A.K.Geetha ... Petitioner

Versus

1.The Revenue Divisional Office Udayarpalayam Ariyalur District 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police Ariyalur District 3.The State Rep by Inspector of Police Thalavai Police Station Ariyalur District 4.Murugan .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 herein to consider the petitioners representation dated 17.03.2025 and provide adequate Police Protection to surveying and put up fencing in the Petitioners land in Survey No 25/36, Adanakirichi Village, Ariyalur District on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Sendurai.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Gokulakrishnan For Respondents : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan for R1 to R3 Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed seeking to direct respondents 1 to 3 herein to consider the petitioners representation dated 17.03.2025 and provide adequate Police Protection to surveying and put up fencing in the Petitioners land in Survey No 25/36, Adanakirichi Village, Ariyalur District on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Sendurai.

2. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the fourth respondent without any valid title entered the petitioner's property and put up the tent and threatening the petitioner.

3. Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record.

4. At the out set, this Court is unable to countenance the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. If at all the petitioner has any dispute with regard to measurement and survey of the land, the proper course is to approach Civil Court by making the respondents as a necessary party and seek to appoint an Advocate Commissioner, without resorting the same, as a blanket order police protection cannot be granted. In our

experience we have also seen by way of police protection order, particularly in measurement of lands, it leads to serious consequences and also encroachments, therefore the rights of the third parties are prejudiced.

5. In view of the above, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 18.08.2025 dhk Index :Yes/No Internet:Yes/No To 1.The Revenue Divisional Office Udayarpalayam Ariyalur District 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police Ariyalur District 3.The Inspector of Police Thalavai Police Station Ariyalur District 4.The Public Prosecutor Madras High Court N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

dhk W.P. No.18038 of 2025 18.08.2025