Jeyakumar S v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.08.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI W.P(MD)Nos.22411 to 22414 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.17499, 17504, 17526 & 17516 of 2025 S.Jeyakumar ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.22411 of 2025 A.Santhiyagu ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.22412 of 2025 C.Rajamanickam ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.22413 of 2025 A.Mariya Yesu ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.22411 of 2025 Vs.
1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Tahsildar, Rajasingamangalam Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.
... Respondents in all W.Ps.
Common Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the 2nd respondents eviction notice in Na.Ka.A3/3018/2025 dated 1/4
16.07.2025 and quash the same and issue the patta in favour of the petitioner in Survey No.116/2 situated at Vadaoorani, Bhagavathimangalam Village, R.S.Mangalam Taluk, Ramanadhapuram District.
For Petitioners :Mr.H.Velavadhas For Respondents :Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam Government Advocate COMMON ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate for the official respondents.
2. These writ petitions are not maintainable because what is assailed are only notices under Section 7 of the Land Encroachment Act. It is well settled that challenge to a mere notice under Section 7 of the Act will not lie. The petitioner can come to the Court only after the eviction order under Section 6 of the Act is passed. These writ petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. [G.R.S., J.] [B.P., J.] 14.08.2025 NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No rmi 2/4
To 1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Tahsildar, Rajasingamangalam Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.
3/4
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J and B.PUGALENDHI, J.
rmi W.P(MD)Nos.22411 to 22414 of 2025 14.08.2025 4/4