Ammasi v. The Tashildar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 07.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ Ammasi : Petitioner Vs.

1.The Tahsildar, Mettur Taluk, Salem District 2.The Inspector of Police, Karumalai Koodal Police Station, Salem District 3.Muniyagondar 4.Venkatachalam 5.Raja 6.Thangavelu 7.Murugan : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to survey and point out the boundaries of the petitioner's property comprised in Survey No.107/2A, 107/2D, 130/2D to a total extent of 3 acres 93 cents situated at Gonur West Village, Mettur Taluk, Salem District with the police aid of the 2nd respondent.

1/6

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Krishnamoorthy For Respondents : Mr.S.Jayachandran, Government Advocate, for respondent No.1 Mr.R.Kishore Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for respondent No.2

ORDER

By consent of learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. In view of the order that this Court proposes to pass and also the limited relief that is sought to be granted, notice to respondent Nos.3 to 7 is dispensed with.

2. The present writ petition is filed praying for a writ of mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to survey and point out the boundaries of the petitioner's property comprised in Survey Nos.107/2A, 107/2D, 130/2D measuring a total extent of 3 acres 93 cents situated at Gonur West Village, Mettur Taluk, Salem District with the police aid of the 2nd respondent.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he submitted an online application 2/6

dated 13.06.2025 before the first respondent seeking to survey and demarcate the boundaries in the subject property and has also paid the appropriate fees, however, the same was not considered. Hence, he again submitted a representation dated 16.06.2025 before the first respondent seeking survey along with police protection. The said representation was not considered so far. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

4. On this being pointed out, the learned Government Advocate would submit that they would consider the petitioner's representations/applications dated 13.06.2025 and 16.06.2025 and carry out survey and demarcate the boundaries in the subject property and complete the process within a time frame to be fixed by this Court, which was agreed to by the learned counsel for the petitioner

5. It is further submitted by the learned Government Advocate that in case police protection is required they would request the 2nd respondent. When this was pointed out, the learned Government Advocate, Mr.R.Kishore Kumar appearing for the 2nd respondent would submit that if any such request is made adequate police protection will be granted.

3/6

6. In view of the limited relief that is prayed, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with following directions: i) The first respondent shall consider the applications/representations dated 13.06.2025 and 16.06.2025 in accordance with law, after issuing notice to the petitioner, respondents 3 to 7, adjacent land owners and all other interested parties including rival claimants, if any. ii) Though facts have been set out extensively in the affidavit, this Court does not propose to deal with it, while leaving it open to the first respondent to call for any document/conduct enquiry, if any, while considering the applications/representations necessary for conducting survey of subject property. It is also open to the first respondent to call for documents to satisfy itself of the petitioner's entitlement for requesting survey of subject property. iii) If any such request is made by the first respondent, the second respondent is directed to provide adequate police protection for conducting the survey.

iv) The entire process shall be completed within a period of twelve weeks from the date of uploading of web copy without waiting for receipt of certified copy.

4/6

v) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any views with regard to the merits of the case and it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the matter on its own merits and in accordance with law. Rights and contentions of the petitioner and all other interested parties are left open.

7. There will be no order as to costs.

07.07.2025 Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order mrn To 1.The Tahsildar, Mettur Taluk, Salem District 2.The Inspector of Police, Karumalai Koodal Police Station, Salem District MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

(mrn) 5/6

07.07.2025 6/6