B.Chinnaponnu v. The District Collector/Monitoring Committee
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date : 13/10/2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE R.POORNIMA W.P.(MD)No.25179 of 2025 B.Chinnaponnu ... Petitioner Vs
1. The District Collector/monitoring Committee, District Collector Office,
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, R.D.O. Office, Srirangam,
3. The Tahsildar,, Manapparai Taluk Office,
4. Senthil, S/o.Kuzhanthaivelu, Kalkattiyur, Karupur, 1/5
5. Saravanan, S/o.Kuzhanthaivelu, Kalkattiyur, Karupur,
6. Murugan,, S/o.Chinnasamy, Kalkattiyur, Karupur, ... Respondents PRAYER :- Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction like a writ, directing the 2nd respondents situated at Trichy District, Manapparai Taluk, Karuppur Village, S.F.No.101/7 and 102 in the light of circular dated 25.06.2024 issued by 1st respondents within a stipulated period as may be fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : M/s.H.Jahir Hussain For Respondents: Mr.M.Sarangan for R1 to R3 Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice) In response to the allegation of encroachment over water body on lands in S.Nos.101/7 and 102, learned State counsel would 2/5
submit that survey has now been conducted and the allegation of encroachment has been found to be partly correct in as much as though an encroachment has been found on S.No.102, which is classified as water body, no encroachment has been found on Government land (dry land) comprised in S.No.101/7.
2. Having found that survey has now been conducted, we are inclined to dispose of the petition with a direction to the respondent authorities to initiate appropriate proceedings under the Land Encroachment Act against the persons, who are found to have encroached upon the lands comprised in S.No.102, i.e., water body, and complete the proceedings within an outer limit of three months. Needless to say that the persons against whom action is proposed to be taken shall be afforded an opportunity of hearing.
3. Though learned counsel for the petitioner disputes the correctness of the survey which has been conducted in so far as land in S.No.101/7 is concerned, in view of the statement made by the learned State counsel that there is a remedy of appeal, we leave it open to the petitioner to work out her remedy in the manner known to law with regard to land comprised in S.No.101/7. 3/5
Writ petition is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ.) (R.POORNIMA, J.) 13.10.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No RR To
1. The District Collector/monitoring Committee, District Collector Office,
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, R.D.O. Office, Srirangam,
3. The Tahsildar,, Manapparai Taluk Office, 4/5
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND R.POORNIMA, J.
Order made in WP(MD) No.25179 of 2025 13.10.2025 5/5