V.Seenuvasan v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 10.07.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI and W.M.P.Nos.20120, 20126 and 20141 of 2024 in W.P.Nos.18322, 18326 and 18332 of 2024 1.V.Seenuvasan ... Petitioner in W.P.No.18322 of 2024 2.M.Khader Meeran ... Petitioner in W.P.No.18326 of 2024 3.K.Manikandan ... Petitioner in W.P.No.18332 of 2024 Vs.

1.The District Collector Villupuram District Villupuram.

2.The Engineer in Chief WRO (Water Resources Organisation) & Chief Engineer Public Works Department Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

3.The Director of Survey and Settlement PWD Estate, Chepauk Triplicane, Chennai - 600 005.

Page Nos.1/38

4.The Deputy Director Land Survey & Records Department Villupuram.

5.The Executive Engineer PWD & Water Resources Organisation Villupuram Municipality Villupuram.

6.The District Revenue Officer Villupuram District Villupuram.

7.The Commissioner Villupuram Municipality Villupuram.

8.The Tahsildar Villupuram Taluk Villupuram District - 605 602.

... Respondents in all WPs Prayer in W.P.No.18322 of 2024 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd to 8th respondents to properly measure and demarcate the boundary of V.Maruthur Lake in Survey No.299/3A, 3B, 4 & 5, V.Maruthur Village, Villupuram Taluk, Villupuram District according to the old revenue records before demolishing the petitioner's property situated at No.54, Rajiv Gandhi Nagar, K.K.Road, V.Maruthur, Villupuram-605 602 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 25.03.2024 within a time period that will be fixed by this Court or pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. Page Nos.2/38

Prayer in W.P.No.18326 of 2024 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd to 8th respondents to properly measure and demarcate the boundary of V.Maruthur Lake in Survey No.299/3A, 3B, 4 & 5, V.Maruthur Village, Villupuram Taluk, Villupuram District according to the old revenue records before demolishing the petitioner's property situated at No.69, Annai Indira Nagar, K.K.Road, V.Maruthur, Villupuram-605 602 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 25.03.2024 within a time period that will be fixed by this Court or pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. Prayer in W.P.No.

18332 of 2024 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd to 8th respondents to properly measure and demarcate the boundary of V.Maruthur Lake in Survey No.299/3A, 3B, 4 & 5, V.Maruthur Village, Villupuram Taluk, Villupuram District according to the old revenue records before demolishing the petitioner's property situated at 69, Annai Indira Nagar, K.K.Road, V.Maruthur, Villupuram - 605 602 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 25.03.2024 within a time period that will be fixed by this Court or pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. Page Nos.

For Petitioner :

Mr.K.Ponraj (in all WPs) for Mr.D.Malaiarasan For Respondents :

Mr.T.K.Saravanan (in all WPs) Government Advocate COMMON ORDER [Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.,] This common order will now dispose of the captioned three 'Writ Petitions' ['WPs' for the sake of brevity and convenience] and 'Writ Miscellaneous Petitions' ['WMPs' for the sake of brevity and convenience] thereat.

2. In similar connected matters being W.P. Nos.17942, 17947 and 17950 of 2024, today an order was made by us and the same reads as follows : 'IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 10.07.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI W.P.Nos.17942, 17947 and 17950 of 2024 and Page Nos.4/38

W.M.P.Nos.19678, 19681 & 19684 of 2024 in W.P.Nos.17942, 17947 and 17950 of 2024 1.A.Kanimozhi ... Petitioner in W.P.No.17942 of 2024 2.K.Kala ... Petitioner in W.P.No.17947 of 2024 3.I.Malarvizhi ... Petitioner in W.P.No.17950 of 2024 Vs.

1.The District Collector Villupuram District Villupuram.

2.The Engineer in Chief WRO (Water Resources Organisation) & Chief Engineer Public Works Department Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

3.The Director of Survey and Settlement PWD Estate, Chepauk Triplicane, Chennai - 600 005.

4.The Deputy Director Land Survey & Records Department Villupuram.

5.The Executive Engineer PWD & Water Resources Organisation Villupuram Municipality Villupuram.

6.The District Revenue Officer Villupuram District Villupuram.

7.The Commissioner Villupuram Municipality Villupuram.

Page Nos.5/38

8.The Tahsildar Villupuram Taluk Villupuram District - 605 602.

Respondents in all WPs Common Prayer in W.P.Nos.17942 & 17947 of 2024 : Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd to 8th respondents to properly measure and demarcate the boundary of V.Maruthur Lake in Survey No.299/3A, 3B, 4 & 5, V.Maruthur Village, Villupuram Taluk, Villupuram District according to the old revenue records before demolishing the petitioner's property situated at No.318, Chinnappa Nagar, Salamedu, Villupuram-605 401 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 25.03.2024 within a time period that will be fixed by this Court or pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. Prayer in W.P.No.

17950 of 2024 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd to 8th respondents to properly measure and demarcate the boundary of V.Maruthur Lake in Survey No.299/3A, 3B, 4 & 5, V.Maruthur Village, Villupuram Taluk, Villupuram District according to the old revenue records before demolishing the petitioner's property situated at 71, Rajiv Gandhi Nagar, K.K.Road, V.Maruthur, Villupuram - 605 602 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 25.03.2024 within a time period that will be fixed by this Court or pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper under the Page Nos.

circumstances of the case.

For Petitioner :

Mr.K.Ponraj (in all WPs) for Mr.D.Malaiarasan For Respondents :

Mr.T.K.Saravanan (in all WPs) Government Advocate COMMON ORDER [Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.,] This common order will now dispose of the captioned three 'Writ Petitions' ['WPs' for the sake of brevity and convenience] and 'Writ Miscellaneous Petitions'

['WMPs' for the sake of brevity and convenience] thereat.

2. This order has to be read in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier proceedings made in the captioned matters yesterday i.e.,09.07.2024, which reads as follows : 'W.P. Nos.17942, 17947 and 17950 of 2024 and W.M.P. No.19678, 19681 and 19684 of 2024 in W.P. Nos.17942, 17947 and 17950 of 2024 M.SUNDAR,J., and K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J., (Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.) Page Nos.7/38

Captioned matters pertain to alleged encroachment in a water body i.e., a lake.

2. Mr.R.Jayaprakash, learned counsel representing the counsel on record for petitioners in the captioned three writ petitions submits that no notice has been served on the three writ petitioners but they are under pain of being dispossessed.

3. Issue notice to respondents.

4. Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Government Advocate accepts notice for all eight respondents and submits on the basis of written instructions that all encroachers (alleged) including three writ petitioners have been put to notice under The Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Act, 2007 but learned counsel for writ petitioners enters upon a disputation qua this submission and submits that the three writ petitioners have not been put on notice.

5. Faced with the above situation, learned State counsel requested for a short accommodation to produce papers to demonstrate that notices have been served on the three writ petitioners.

6. List tomorrow under the cause list caption 'NOTICE REGARDING ADMISSION' in the Admission Board i.e., Motion List.

7. List on 10.07.2024.

(M.S.J.) (K.G.T.J.) 09.07.2024'

3. Pursuant to the aforementioned earlier proceedings, today Mr.K.Ponraj, learned counsel for the three writ petitioner in captioned Page Nos.8/38

three WPs (one writ petitioner in each WP) and Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Government Advocate for all eight respondents in all three WPs are before us.

4. Considering the limited legal perimeter within which the captioned matters perambulate, with the consent of learned counsel on both sides, main WPs were taken up and heard out.

5. Adverting to earlier proceedings made yesterday (i.e., on 09.07.2024), learned Government Advocate has placed before us a typedset of papers demonstrating that notices issued under 'The Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Act, 2007 (Act No.8 of 2007)' [hereinafter 'Tanks Act' for the sake of brevity and convenience] and the Rules thereunder i.e., 'Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Rules, 2007' [hereinafter 'Tanks Rules' for the sake of brevity and convenience].

6. Learned counsel for writ petitioners have been favoured with a copy of aforementioned typed set and there is no disputation that the three writ petitioners have been served notices under the Tanks Act and Tanks Rules thereunder. A scanned reproduction of the notices are as under :

Page Nos.9/38

Page Nos.10/38

Page Nos.11/38

Page Nos.12/38

Page Nos.13/38

Page Nos.14/38

Page Nos.15/38

7. As regards Tanks Act and Tanks Rules thereunder, adverting to the declaration of law made by a Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in T.K.Shanmugam (FB) case [T.K.Shanmugam Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2015 (5) LW 397], we disposed of an earlier writ petition being W.P.No.16970 of 2024 [K.K.Perumal Vs. The District Collector, Namakkal District] on 28.06.2024, and the same reads as follows : 'IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 28.06.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI W.P.No.16970 of 2024 & W.M.P.No.18687 of 2024 in W.P.No.16970 of 2024 K.K.Perumal ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector Namakkal District Namakkal - 636 001

2. The Revenue Tahsildar Raispuram Taluk Namakkal District Page Nos.16/38

3. The Assistant Engineer Water Resources Department (Irrigation Division) Rasipuram Namakkal District ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned orders in Letter No. File 3/2024/AE (RA) dated 11.06.2024 and Form III under Rule 6(1) dated 03.11.2022 issued by the 3rd respondent, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to grant patta for S.F.No.26/6 (0.30.5 Hrs) and S.F.No.466/2 (0.25.0 Hrs), R.Pudupatti Village, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District.

For Petitioners :

Mr.N.Manokaran For Respondents :

Mr.P.Balathandayutham Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.,] This common order will govern captioned main 'Writ Petition' ['WP' for the sake of brevity] and 'Writ Miscellaneous Petition' ['WMP' for the sake of brevity] thereat.

2. Captioned WP pertains to two parcels of land i.e,,'S.F.No.26/6 (0.30.5 Hectares) and S.F.No.466/2 (0.25.0 Hectares), both situate in R.Pudupatti Village, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District' [hereinafter Page Nos.17/38

'said land' for the sake of brevity].

3. Mr.N.Manokaran, learned counsel for writ petitioner adverting to the writ support affidavit submitted that the writ petitioner is an Agriculturist, he had spent his life-time earnings /savings and purchased 2.95 acres of land comprised in three different survey numbers, namely S.F.Nos.26/5, 466/3C, 466/5C in R.Pudupatti Village, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District with a Well and a 5 HP Motor thereon vide a Registered sale deed dated 11.03.2016 [Document No.518/2016 on the file of Sub-Registrar, Namagiripettai] from one S.R.Murugesan. It is the further case of the writ petitioner that the Well referred to in the sale deed is located in one parcel of said lands, namely S.F.No.26/6 as per 'A' Registrar extract and FMB for entire Survey Number i.e., S.F.No.26.

It is submitted that said Well was dug prior to 1950s and the Electricity Service Connection S.C.No.129 for 5 HP motor itself was obtained on 05.03.1972. It is the further case of the writ petitioner that writ petitioner is in occupation of the second parcel of said lands, namely S.No.466/2 but it is writ petitioner's say that he never knew that it is a canal and according to the writ petitioner, on the ground there is no canal.

4. Considering that this is a writ petition and further considering the limited legal perimeter within which the captioned writ petition has to perambulate, we deem it appropriate to not to dilate further on facts and also write that we express no opinion or view on the aforementioned averments. The reason is, we would now be relegating the matter to the Officer of the 'Public Works Department' ['PWD'] concerned, who in this case is R3.

Page Nos.18/38

5. Though we have written that we would not be dilating more on facts, for the sake of completion of facts, we deem it appropriate to capture the further fact that according to the writ petitioner, a notice dated 26.09.2022 bearing reference e/f/9617-2021-gp1 under Section 7 of 'The Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905' [hereinafter 'said Act' for the sake of brevity] was issued in respect of the aforementioned Well, followed by a eviction notice (issued by R2) under Section 6 of said Act being notice dated 31.10.2022 bearing reference e/f/92172021-gp1 but thereafter, on protest by the writ petitioner and others in the neighbourhood, no further action was taken, is writ petitioner counsel's say.

6. Reverting to the captioned WP, close on the heels of the aforementioned notice under Section 6 of said Act, R3 issued two notices, both dated 03.11.2022, both being notices under the Rules under 'Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Act, 2007 (Act No.8 of 2007)' [hereinafter 'said Tank Act' for the sake of brevity and convenience]. To be noted, the Rules under said Tank Act is a piece of subordinate legislation and the title is 'Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Rules, 2007' [hereinafter 'said Tank Rules' for the sake of brevity and convenience].

7. The said Tank Act kicked in on 23.05.2007 and said Tank Rules thereunder kicked in on 01.10.2007. As regards two 03.11.2022 notices, one is vide Form-II of said Tank Rules (Rule 5(3) of said Tank Rules) and another is Form-III of said Tank Rules (Rule 6(1) of said Tank Rules) [hereinafter 'I impugned notice' for the sake of convenience]. Page Nos.19/38

After I impugned notice, R3 has issued another notice being 'notice dated 11.06.2024 bearing reference f/vz; /nfh 3/2024/c/bgh(,uh)' [hereinafter 'II impugned notice' for the sake of convenience]. Inter alia assailing I and II impugned notices, captioned WP has been filed.

8. Notwithstanding very many averments and grounds in the writ support affidavit, learned counsel for writ petitioner predicated his argument in the Admission Board before us on one point and that one point is, no prior opportunity has been given to the writ petitioner i.e., prior to the impugned notice.

9. Before we proceed further, for the sake of convenience and clarity, we deem it appropriate to scan and reproduce the impugned notices and the same are as follows:

I Impugned Notice Page Nos.20/38

II Impugned Notice Page Nos.21/38

10. Issue notice i.e., notice regarding admission.

11. Mr.P.Balathandayutham, learned Special Government Pleader has accepted notice for all three respondents.

12. Owing to the limited legal perimeter qua the legal drill on hand about which there is allusion supra, with the consent of both sides, main WP itself was taken up and heard out in the Admission Board.

13. As regards the lone point on which the impugned notice is being assailed i.e., no prior opportunity has been given or in other words, the writ petitioner has not been given an opportunity to showcause, learned counsel for writ petitioner pressed into service a Full Bench judgement of this Court in T.K.Shanmugam's case {T.K.Shanmugam Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2015 (5) LW 397}. As there is more than one T.K.Shanmugam case pertaining to water bodies, we shall be referring to this '2015 (5) LW 397 Full Bench order [order dated 30.10.2015]' as 'T.K.Shanmugam (FB) case' {'FB' denoting 'Full Bench'}.

14. In T.K.Shanmugam (FB) case, a Hon'ble Full Bench of three Judges of this Court was considering a reference made by a Division Bench being a reference vide order dated 05.08.2015 in W.P.No.1294 of 2009. In T.K.Shanmugam (FB) case, the reference broadly stated is, as regards L.Krishnan principle [L. Krishnan vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2005 (4) CTC 1] which was followed in Sivakasi Region Tax Payers Association vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2008) 5 MLJ 1425. In L.Krishnan's case, the need to protect water bodies was emphasized and that gave birth to said Tank Act and obviously the said Tank Rules thereunder as it is a piece of Page Nos.22/38

Subordinate legislation made by the Executive Arm in exercise of Rule making powers under said Tank Act being Rule making power under Section 13(1) of said Tank Act. Be that as it may, dilution of this principle (L.Krishnan principle) happened by way of three Executive Fiats, namely G.O.Ms.No.854 dated 30.12.2006, G.O.Ms.No.498 dated 05.09.2007 and G.O.Ms.No.34 dated 23.01.2008 wherein and whereby provision was made for grant of patta for those who are in occupation for ten years, this ten years was subsequently reduced to five years and further reduced to three years vide the three Government Orders. Thereafter the vires of the said Tank Act was assailed in T.S.Senthil Kumar's case [T.S.Senthil Kumar vs. Government of Tamil Nadu] and vide order dated 10.02.

2010 reported in 2010-3-MLJ-771, the vires was upheld albeit providing for 'principles of natural justice' ['NJP' for the sake of brevity] being telescoped qua said Tank Act and said Tank Rules. This T.S.Senthil Kumar case was affirmed by the Full Bench in T.K.Shanmugam (FB) case. This is articulated in paragraph 15 of the T.K.

'15(f) We uphold the Act, while we provide for observance of principles of natural justice within the Act itself, as under. (i) When the officer of the Public Works Department publishes the notice in Form-II in the notice boards of the offices of Village Administrative Officer, Village Panchayat Office and the Water Resources Organization, notice shall also be issued to the alleged encroacher to the effect that the survey indicates that the place in Page Nos.23/38

his/her occupation is an encroachment and secondly, the notice in Form-III of the Rules may be issued.

(ii) On receipt of the said notice, the encroacher may give his/her objections relating to the classification of the land in his/her occupation and the nature of the encroachment within a period of two weeks. (iii) Thereafter, the authorities shall consider the objections and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with the provisions of the Act, giving time to the encroachers to remove the encroachment.'

15. From hereon and henceforth, we shall refer to aforementioned procedure as '(f)(i)(ii)(iii) procedure of T.K.Shanmugam (FB) case law' for the sake of convenience and clarity.

16. In the case on hand, as the lone grievance of the writ petitioner is that the writ petitioner / noticee has not been show-caused prior to the impugned notice, we are of the considered view that the same can be addressed and redressed by directing R3 and other Officers of PWD Department under said Tank Act and said Tank Rules to adhere to (f)(i)(ii)(iii) procedure of T.K.Shanmugam case law by treating the impugned notices as a 'show-cause notices' ('SCNs' in plural and 'SCN' in singular for the sake of brevity and convenience).

17. As we have already extracted and reproduced (f)(i)(ii)(iii) procedure of T.K.Shanmugam (FB) case, we are not setting out the same again.

18. In the light of the narrative, discussion and dispositive reasoning thus far, we dispose of the captioned WP by holding that the impugned notices will now be treated as SCNs and '(f)(i)(ii)(iii) Page Nos.24/38

procedure of T.K.Shanmugam (FB) case' shall be followed by R3 and other Officers of PWD Department under said Tank Act and said Tank Rules, proceed with the same and conclude the proceedings as expeditiously as the business of R3 would permit. As regards, f(ii) of (f)(i)(ii)(iii) procedure of T.K.Shanmugam (FB) case law, two weeks will now be computed from today i.e., 12.07.2024.

19. Before we write the concluding paragraph of this order, though obvious, we make it clear that we have not expressed any view or opinion on the merits of the matter and we are leaving open all questions as the same can be raised by the writ petitioner in response to the impugned notices, which have now become SCNs by virtue of this order.

20. We deem it appropriate to capture one more submission before writing the concluding paragraph and that is the submission made by the State counsel. Learned State counsel pointed out that the I impugned notice has been issued in November of 2022 and preceded by notices under said Act but the captioned WP has been filed only on 18.06.2024. As the impugned notices are not SCNs and as they do not call upon the writ petitioner to show-cause, we are of the view that this aspect of the matter is condonable in the case on hand but we make it clear that it will not serve as a precedent in all cases of similar/same nature. We have also taken into account the literacy level of the writ petitioner (school drop out) and that he is an agriculturist by avocation in a village.

21. We also deem it appropriate to capture that there was an earlier writ petition in W.P.No.22167 of 2022 filed by one Thiru.M. Page Nos.25/38

Kandasamy as a Public Interest Litigation [PIL] with a prayer to remove the alleged encroachment and in the prayer, there is a mention about one parcel of said lands i.e., S.F.No.26/6 but the order therein brings to light that in W.P.No.22167 of 2022, the State counsel has not referred to S.F.No.26/6 as a water body but we refrain from expressing any view or opinion as we are relegating the matter to R3. We also deem it appropriate to extract and reproduce the order of another Hon'ble Division Bench dated 05.07.2022 in a PIL i.e., W.P.No.22167 of 2022 and a scanned reproduction of the same is as follows: Page Nos.26/38

Page Nos.27/38

Page Nos.28/38

Captioned WP disposed of in the aforesaid manner albeit with aforementioned directives and observations. Consequently, captioned WMP thereat is also disposed of as closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

(M.S.,J.) (K.G.T.,J.) 28.06.2024'

8. Suffice to say that captioned WPs will also now stand governed by the aforementioned K.K.Perumal's case. The most Page Nos.29/38

relevant paragraphs are paragraph Nos.14 and 15. Therefore, it will further suffice to say that the concerned respondent shall do well to adhere to what is being referred to as '(f)(i)(ii)(iii) procedure of T.K.Shanmugam's (FB) case law' qua the aforementioned notices that have now been issued to the three writ petitioners.

9. Learned State counsel brought to our notice that the entire action is pursuant to the order of another Hon'ble Division Bench in a suo motu WP being Suo Motu W.P.No.33556 of 2017. The order dated 23.08.2023 made in the suo motu WP has been placed before us and a scanned reproduction of the same is as follows : Page Nos.30/38

Page Nos.31/38

Page Nos.32/38

Page Nos.33/38

Page Nos.34/38

10. Removal of encroachments (if that be so) pursuant to the aforementioned notices is obviously removal in accordance with (f)(i)(ii)(iii) procedure of T.K.Shanmugam's (FB) case.

11. Captioned WPs are disposed of saying that the aforementioned notices issued to three writ petitioners shall be carried to its logical end by following (f)(i)(ii)(iii) procedure of T.K.Shanmugam's (FB) case. As T.K.Shanmugam's (FB) case has been rendered by a Hon'ble Full Bench, though obvious we make it clear that the proceedings before this Division Bench and/or any other Division Bench will also be subject to (f)(i)(ii)(iii) procedure being the declaration of law made in T.K.Shanmugam's (FB) case.

12. Though obvious, we make it clear that we have not expressed any view or opinion on the merits of the matter and the authorities concerned shall proceed with the notices issued, on their own merits and in accordance with law albeit adhering to f(i)(ii)(iii) procedure of Page Nos.35/38

T.K.Shanmugam's (FB) case. For this purpose, all questions are left open.

13. Captioned WPs are disposed of in the aforesaid manner albeit with the aforementioned directives and observations. Consequently, captioned WMPs thereat are also disposed of as closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

(M.S.,J.) (K.G.T.,J.) 10.07.2024'

3. Suffice to say that captioned WPs are disposed of in terms of the aforementioned common order i.e., order in W.P. Nos.17942, 17947 and 17950 of 2024 (To be noted, notices issued to the three writ petitioners in the captioned WPs have also been scanned and reproduced in the aforementioned order). Consequently, captioned WMPs thereat are also disposed of as closed. There shall be no order as to costs. (M.S.,J.) (K.G.T.,J.) 10.07.2024 Index : Yes Speaking ds Page Nos.36/38

To:

1.The District Collector Villupuram District Villupuram.

2.The Engineer in Chief WRO (Water Resources Organisation) & Chief Engineer Public Works Department Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

3.The Director of Survey and Settlement PWD Estate, Chepauk Triplicane, Chennai - 600 005.

4.The Deputy Director Land Survey & Records Department Villupuram.

5.The Executive Engineer PWD & Water Resources Organisation Villupuram Municipality Villupuram.

6.The District Revenue Officer Villupuram District Villupuram.

7.The Commissioner Villupuram Municipality Villupuram.

8.The Tahsildar Villupuram Taluk Villupuram District - 605 602.

Page Nos.37/38

M.SUNDAR, J., and K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J., ds 10.07.2024 Page Nos.38/38