S.Suryaprkash v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17.02.2026 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN S.Suryaprkash S/o.Somasudnaram No.4/122, Therku Kadu Periyeri Village, Thalaivasal Taluk Salem District-636 101.

Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The District Collector Salem District Salem.

2. The Tahsildar Thalaivasal Salem District.

3. Rathinakumari, W/o.Subramani Kozhipannaikadu Periyeri Village Salem District-636 101.

4. Gunasekaran S/o.Palanivel Kozhipannaikadu Periyeri Village Salem District-636 101.

Respondent(s) Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to remove the encroachment made by the respondents 3 and 4 in cart Track situated in S.No.379/4, Periyeri Village, Thalaivasal taluk, Salem District consequently directing the respondents 1 and 2 to lay the road in S.No.379/4, Periyeri Village, Thalaivasal Taluk, Salem District. For Petitioner(s):

Mr. C.Prakasam For Respondent(s):

Mr. E.Vijay Anand Addl. Govt. Pleader for R1 & R2 Ms. K.Mumtha For Mr. R.Thirumoorthy for R3 & R4

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) In response to the allegation of encroachment, in the status affidavit filed by official respondents, it is stated that after survey,

show cause notice was issued, followed by order of removal of encroachment by final eviction notice under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. Therefore, official respondents have acted in accordance with law.

2. Learned counsel for private respondents would submit that according to private respondents, there is no encroachment and the order has been assailed by way of appeal, which is now pending consideration of the District Collector.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that in the circumstances of the case, the appeal itself should be disposed of at the earliest.

4. Considering the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for parties, at this stage, we are of the view that we need not proceed further in the writ petition, because, the matter is pending consideration at the appellate stage.

5. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J) 17.02.2026 Index :

Yes/No Yes/No kpl To

1. The District Collector Salem District Salem.

2. The Tahsildar Thalaivasal Salem District.

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

(kpl) 17.02.2026