Madras High CourtWP Crl./279/2025disposed of

M.Raja v. The State Rep. By The Superintendent Of Police,

2025-07-15Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15-07-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P. VELMURUGAN

1. M.Raja S/o.Marimuthu, Kottavadi post, Kottadavi south kadu, Pethanaikan Palayam taluk, Salem District.

Appellant(s) Vs

1. The State Rep. by The Superintendent of Police, Salem District, Salem.

2.The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Eatharpur police station, Salem District.

3.Revenue Surveyor, kottavadi, Pethanaiken palayam Taluk, Salem District.

1/6

4.M.Vellaiyan, S/o.Marimuthu, Kottavadi post, Pethanaikan palayam Taluk, Salem District.

Respondent(s) PRAYER This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue writ of mandamus, directing the first and second respondents to grant police protection to the 3rd respondent and his subordinate to survey the land property measuring about 75 cents situated at Mettu Udayarpalayam village, Pethanaickenpalayam Taluk, Salem District by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 06.05.2025 on the file of first and second respondents. For Appellant(s):

Mr.K.Kalaikovan For Respondent(s):

Dr.C.E.Pratap Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R1 And R2

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed to issue Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to grant Police protection to the third respondent and his subordinates to survey the land/property measuring about 75 cents situated at Mettu Udayarpalayam village, Pethanaickenpalayam Taluk, Salem District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 06.05.2025. 2/6

2. According to the petitioner, he made an application before the third respondent to survey the land. When the third respondent went along with their staff to survey the land, the fourth respondent prevented the third respondent to conduct survey. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents-Police 1 and 2 to grant Police protection to the 3rd respondent and his subordinates to survey the land.

3. On a perusal of the records, it is seen that it is a civil dispute. Further, the petitioner's application before the third respondent is pending. It is the duty of the third respondent to conduct survey as per the Survey and Boundaries Act. If there is any hindrance, it is for the third respondent to work out their remedy to give the relief to the petitioner. The petitioner cannot straight away approach this Court for granting Police protection. Further, this Court cannot conduct a roving enquiry regarding the right and possession of the parties. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant the relief as sought for by the petitioner in this petition. However, the petitioner is at liberty to work his remedy in the manner known to law before the appropriate forum.

3/6

4. With the abovesaid direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. 15-07-2025 mfa Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes 4/6

To 1.The State Rep. by the Superintendent of Police, Salem District, Salem.

2.The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Eatharpur police station, Salem District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai.

5/6

P.VELMURUGAN J.

mfa 15-07-2025 6/6