Jayanthi v. The District Collector

2026:MHC:425

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02.02.2026 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN and W.M.P.No.21118 of 2025 1.Jayanthi 2.Chellaponnu 3.Valarmathi 4.Mangaiyarkarasi 5.Krishnaveni 6.Gomathi 7.Rajakumari 8.Gayathri 9.Meenakshi 10.Amudha 11.Parvathi 12.Prema 13.Ananthi 14.Chitarasi 15.Krishnammal 16.Shanthi 17.Kalyani 18.Thavamani 1/6

19.Mallika 20.Thaiyalnayaki 21.Shanthi 22.Shanthi 23.Thamayandi 24.Manikandan 25.Thenaruvi 26.Vasantha 27.Usha 28.Suganya 29.Murugesan 30.Valli 31.Premavathi 32.Gomathi 33.Ramachandran ... Petitioners -vs1.The District Collector, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

2.The Sub-Collector, Chidambaram, Cuddalore District.

3.The Tahsildar, Chidambaram Taluk, Chidambaram, Cuddalore District.

4.Balakrishnan ... Respondents 2/6

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the entire records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.A4/574/2024, dated 15.05.2025 and quash the same. For Petitioners : Mr.C.Prakasam For Respondents : Mr.T.Arun Kumar, Addl. Govt. Pleader for R1 to R3 Mr.D.Murthy for R4 *****

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.,) The Writ Petition has been instituted challenging the order dated 15.05.2025 passed by the Sub-Collector, Chidambaram.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the subject property is not a water body.

3. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Pleader and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 4th respondent would oppose by stating that it is a water body and classified as "Pond/Kulam". 3/6

4. The said disputed facts are to be ascertained based on the revenue records and documents available. The Sub-Collector formed an opinion in the impugned order that it is a water body. However, appeal would lie before the District Collector. Instead of preferring an appeal, the petitioners have chosen to file the present Writ Petition.

5. The disputed facts regarding classification are to be adjudicated based on the revenue records and documents, if any, produced between the parties. Granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the District Collector, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (S.M.S,J.,) (C.K,J.,) 02.02.2026 Index: Yes / No Internet: Yes / No dsa 4/6

To:

1.The District Collector, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

2.The Sub-Collector, Chidambaram, Cuddalore District.

3.The Tahsildar, Chidambaram Taluk, Chidambaram, Cuddalore District.

5/6

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

AND C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

dsa 02.02.2026 6/6