S.Subba Pillai v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 19.06.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

1. S.Subba Pillai

2. S.Sankar ... Petitioners Vs.

1. The District Collector, Madurai District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur Taluk, Madurai District.

3. The Tahsildhar, The Tahsildhar Office, Madurai East Taluk, Madurai District.

4. The Village Administrative Officer, Arumbanur II Bit, Madurai East Taluk, Madurai District.

5. The Block Development Officer, Arumbanur II Bit, Madurai East Taluk, Madurai District.

6. Karthick

7. Jegajeevan ... Respondents 1/5

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first Respondent to pay fair and reasonable compensation to the petitioners, for destroyed the petitioners developments made in Survey No.50, 51/15 to the extent of 83 cents situated at Arumbanur II Bit Village, Madurai East Taluk, Madurai District, by considering the petitioners' representation dated 03.02.2025. For Petitioners : Mr.M.Abdul Rashith For R1 to R5 : Mr.R.Ragavendran Government Advocate

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first Respondent to pay fair and reasonable compensation to the petitioners, for destroyed the petitioners developments made in Survey No. 50, 51/15 to the extent of 83 cents situated at Arumbanur II Bit Village, Madurai East Taluk, Madurai District, by considering the petitioners' representation dated 03.02.2025.

2. Admittedly, the petitioners were granted 2C patta in respect of the subject property. However, the respondents all of a sudden, entered the said property and 2/5

put up constructions. Accordingly to the petitioners, there were 43 trees on the property. However, the respondents claim that there were no trees at all.

3. On perusal of the photographs annexed with the typed set of papers, it is seen that there are five coconut trees and others are karuvelam trees, and not 43 trees, as claimed by the petitioner. The photographs submitted by the respondents show only karuvelam trees and no coconut trees. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner to pay compensation in respect of 43 trees is not true and is accordingly rejected.

4. However, the petitioners were granted 2C patta which evidences lawful possession. Without cancelling the 2C patta, all of a sudden, the respondents entered the land of the petitioners, which is a clear violation of principles of natural justice.

5. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to some form of compensation. Considering the total extent of the land, which is 83 cents, this Court directs the official respondents to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) as compensation to the petitioners, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above said direction, this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall 3/5

be no order as to costs.

19.06.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes jbr To:

1. The District Collector, Madurai District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur Taluk, Madurai District.

3. The Tahsildhar, The Tahsildhar Office, Madurai East Taluk, Madurai District.

4. The Village Administrative Officer, Arumbanur II Bit, Madurai East Taluk, Madurai District.

5. The Block Development Officer, Arumbanur II Bit, Madurai East Taluk, Madurai District.

4/5

S.SRIMATHY , J.

jbr ORDER MADE IN DATED : 19.06.2025 5/5