Madras High CourtWP/44981/2025disposed of

Kannaiyan v. The District Collector

2025-11-26Honourable The Chief Justice,Honourable Mr.Justice G.Arul Murugan4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26.11.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN Kannaiyan : Petitioner versus 1.The District Collector Office of the District Collector, Cuddalore District.

2.The Revenue District Officer, Office of Revenue District Officer, Cuddalore District 3.The Tahsildhar, Thittakudi Cuddalore District 4.The Block Development Officer,(Panchayath) Mangalore Union, Cuddalore District 5.Aathimoolam 6.Poongavanam 7.Govindhan 8.Gandhimathi 9.Periyasamy 10.Jothivel : Respondents

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 to 4 to remove the encroachment made by the respondents 5 to 10 in the lands situated at survey number 140/6 and 7 and survey number 89/1 in Alathur Village, Thittakudi Circle, Cuddalore District pursuant to the petitioner's representation dated 08.09.2025.

For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Rajasekar For Respondents :

Mr.K.Karthik Jagannath, Government Advocate, for respondents 1 to 4

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) The allegation in this public interest litigation is that respondents 5 to 10 have encroached upon a waterbody.

2. The petitioner in his representation dated 08.09.2025 has referred to Plot Nos.140/6 and 7, as also Plot No.89/1, as watershed area, as per the revenue records.

3. When we looked into the revenue document annexed along with the petition, we find that Plot No.89/1 is recorded as grazing land. There is no material placed with regard to the other plots. In the relief clause, the petitioner has referred to the plots as survey numbers.

4. Learned State Counsel, on advance instructions, would submit that as far as allegation of encroachment of land at S.No.89/1 is concerned, appropriate survey would be conducted, and if any encroachment is found, action would be taken.

5. As regards the other survey numbers, there is no material placed on record by the petitioner, even to prima facie satisfy the Court with regard to the allegation made either in the petition or in the representation.

6. In the absence of any material, we are not inclined to consider the petitioner's complaint with regard to other lands. In view of the statement made by learned State Counsel, survey shall be conducted insofar as Plot No.89/1 is concerned, and if any encroachment is found, appropriate action shall be taken.

7. The petition stands disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.

(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ.) (G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.) 26.11.2025 tar

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

(tar) To 1.The District Collector Office of the District Collector, Cuddalore District.