R.Ganesan, S/O.Ramaiah v. The Tahsildar,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.07.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P(MD)No.14827 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.10963; 10964 and13114 of 2016 R.Ganesan .. Petitioner Vs.

The Tahsildar, Cheranmahadevi Taluk, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District .. Respondent PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in pursuant to the impugned notice issued by the respondent dated 25.07.2016 in Na.Ka.A6/767/16, which was served to the petitioner on 30.07.2016 and quash the same and consequently forbearing the respondent and his subordinates in any manner from disturbing petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of his land in Survey No.260/8, Kooniyur Village, Cheranmahadevi Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

For petitioner : Mr.J.Parekhkumar For Respondent : Mr.T.S.Md.Mohideen Additional Government Pleader For proposed impleading party : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.] In this writ petition, notice under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, dated 25.07.2016 issued by the respondent has been questioned.

2.Under Section 7 of the Act, encroacher is given opportunity to lodge his objection. It does not prejudice his rights. Therefore, writ petition against notice under Section 7 of the Act will not lie. Hence, we are not inclined to interfere with the notice impugned in this writ petition.

3.However, the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner contends that the Tahsilar without passing final orders under Section 6 of the Act with regard to the property in question, attempted to demolish the same.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.It is seen from the typed set of papers that the writ petitioner has given his objections dated 05.08.2016, in response to the Section 7 notice. We direct the respondent to consider the said objections and pass final orders under Section 6 of the Act and only thereafter proceed to remove the encroachment, if any. We make it clear that the respondent Tahsildar shall not interfere with the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of the property in question, without passing final orders under Section 6 of the Act. The question of taking possession would arise only based on the ultimate order to be passed by the Tahsildar under Section 6 of the Act.

5.The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Tahsildar, Cheranmahadevi Taluk, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District.

+1cc to M/S.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, Advocate SR.No. 67444 +1cc to M/S.J.Parekhkumar, Advocate SR.No. 67565 +1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No. 68375 ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.14827 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD)No.10963 and 10964 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD)No.13114 of 2016 25.07.2017 RJ2/VSG JM/KK/SAR 1/08.08.2017/2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/