G.Ayyavoo, v. Thiru. Prasanth,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02.04.2026 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN G. Ayyavoo 23, Mariyamman Koil Street Kachirayapalayam-606 207 Chinnasalem Taluk Kallakurichi District.

..

Petitioner Vs.

1. Thiru Prasanth District Collector Kallakurichi District Kallakurichi-606 213.

2. Thiru Lourdhusamy Revenue Divisional Officer Kallakurichi-606 213.

3. Thiru Manoj Munian Tahsildar Chinnasalem Taluk Office Chinnasalem-606 201 Kallakurichi District.

4. Thiru Vijayakumar Assistant Executive Engineer Water Resources Department Kallakurichi District Kallakurichi-606 213.

5. Thiru Ranjith Executive Officer Vadakkanandal Town Panchayat Kachirayapalam - 606 207 Chinnasalem Taluk Kallakurichi District.

..

Respondents Prayer : Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 seeking to punish the respondents for wilful disobedience of the order dated 01.04.2024 passed in W.P.No.8387 of 2024. For Petitioner :

Mr.K.Magesh For Respondents :

Mr.K.Karthik Jagannath Government Advocate

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) The present contempt petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the order dated 01.04.2024 passed in W.P.No.8387 of 2024.

2. The writ petition was disposed of on the submissions of learned State Government Pleader that they would conduct survey within a period of four months and if any encroachment is found,

upon survey, steps would be taken immediately in accordance with law.

3. Pursuant to the filing of contempt petition, respondent authorities came up with a plea that all the encroachments have been removed. The status report submitted by respondent authorities was rejected by this Court and learned Principal Sub Judge, Kallakurichi was directed to submit a report regarding encroachment, if any, vide order dated 05.03.2025.

4. The learned Principal Sub Judge, Kallakurichi has filed a report. In the report, it is categorically stated that there is no encroachment in S.No.27 which leads to the channel situated between houses. However, two encroachments were found in S.No.34/1. Those encroachments were demolished earlier, but the debris are still not cleared.

5. In view of the aforesaid report, we are inclined to drop the contempt proceedings. However, petitioner would be at liberty to

avail the remedy in accordance with law, if any encroachment still exists.

6. Contempt petition is closed.

(SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI,CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J) 02.04.2026 kpl

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND G.ARUL MURUGAN,J.

(kpl) 02.04.2026