Pari v. Sivaprasad
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 07.11.2025 CORAM :
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI S.Pari ... Petitioner Vs.
1.Mr.Sivaprasad, The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
2.Mr.Jeyabal, The Sub-Inspector of Police, Taluk Police Station, Devakottai, Sivagangai District.
3.The Tahsildar, Ramnagar, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District.
... Respondents (R3 suo motu impleaded as per order in Cont.P.(MD)No.3001 of 2025 dated 16.10.2025) Prayer :
Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of the Courts Act, 1971, praying to punish the contemnors/respondents 2 & 3 in WP.(MD)No.17764 of 2024 for wilful disobedience of order dated 31.07.2024. 1/9
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Balasundaram, Senior Counsel, for M/s.KBS Law Office For R1 & R2 : Mr.P.Kottaichamy, Government Advocate(Crl.side) For R3 : Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar, Special Government Pleader.
ORDER
The petitioner has approached this Court that the order of this Court in WP.(MD)No.17764 of 2024 dated 31.07.2024 has not been complied with.
2.The petitioner claiming to be the owner of the properties in Survey Nos.363/1, 363/2A, 364/6 to an extent of 15 acres situated at Meyyappanenthal, village, Thidakottai Group, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District, has filed a writ petition before this Court in WP.(MD)No.18917 of 2023. The said writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 04.08.2023 by recording the submissions of the learned Additional Government Pleader that the application of the petitioner to conduct survey would be considered on seniority 2/9
basis and that petitioner's application would be considered within a period of eight weeks. The petitioner has again approached this Court by way of filing another writ petition in WP.(MD)No.17764 of 2025 that the Tahsildar has not conducted the survey as undertook before this Court in WP.(MD)No.18917 of 2023. In the second writ petition, the Tahsildar expressed certain difficulties in conducting the survey and that there is an agitation in the village and therefore, the petitioner has to seek Police protection for conducting survey. Considering this rival submission, this Court by its order dated 31.07.2024 disposed of the said writ petition permitting the petitioner to seek remedy of contempt for non compliance of the order passed in WP.(MD)No.
18917 of 2023 and also directing the respondent Police to provide necessary Police protection, if the survey department sought for any protection for conducting the survey. This contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner that the Police has not provided Police protection as directed by this Court in WP.(MD)No.17764 of 2024 dated 31.07.2024.
3.On, 16.10.2025, when this contempt petition was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the respondent Police submitted that necessary Police 3/9
protection was provided, however, there was an agitation by the villagers and therefore, the Revenue Officials abandoned the survey process. He further submitted that as against the persons, who have involved in agitation, a criminal case in Cr.No.260 of 2025 has been registered. Considering the said submission, this Court by its order dated 16.10.2025, suo motu impleaded the Tahsildar, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District as a third respondent to this contempt proceedings.
4.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the third respondent submits that in the event adequate Police protection is provided to survey the land of the petitioner, then, there is no difficulty for conducting the survey. 5.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the respondent Police submits that they are prepared to provide Police protection. Even today, there are Police in the field, however, the petitioner is not available. He further submits that the petitioner, taking advantage of the earlier order for conducting survey, has attempted to fence the property, which has created the law and order problem in the village. 4/9
6.Mr.K.Saravanan, Inspector of Police, Devakottai Taluk Police Station is present before this Court. According to him, the persons, who have involved in agitation, are claiming to be cultivating tenants and they have been cultivating the subject land for several decades. However, the petitioner has purchased the land from its owner. On the previous occasion, when the Revenue Officials went to the place for conducting the survey, the cultivating tenants have raised some objections and therefore, there was a law and order problem.
7.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties in detail and perused the materials placed on record. 8.The petitioner claims that he is the owner of the property, pursuant to a sale deed dated 23.12.2013 and a settlement deed dated 08.05.2023. The petitioner also claims that the patta stands in his name. While so, it is the duty of the survey department to conduct the survey, if an application has been made by the owner of the land for conducting survey. The petitioner has also applied for conducting survey in the month January 2023 and has also approached this Court in WP.(MD)No.18917 of 2023, wherein, the Revenue Officials have taken a plea that survey would be 5/9
conducted within a stipulated period. Recording the same, the said petition was closed. Even thereafter, the survey has not been conducted. The Revenue Officials has taken a plea that there was a law and order problem and without Police protection, they cannot conduct the survey. Therefore, this Court in WP.(MD)No. 17764 of 2024 directed the respondent Police to provide Police protection, if any request is made from the survey department. 9.It appears that request was made and Police protection was also provided and there was an attempt to conduct the survey, on 04.08.2025. However, there was a law and order problem. Some of the villagers have raised some objections and they have prevented the conduct of survey that they are the cultivating tenants of the subject land. However, it appears that there is no document in favour of the agitators to show that they are cultivating tenants and they have been recorded as cultivating tenants by the competent authority. The respondent Police has also registered a case in Cr.No.260 of 2025 as against the agitators.
10.From the above, it appears that there is some agitation by the villagers. The persons, who have involved in agitation, have to 6/9
workout their remedy in the manner known to law. Admittedly, the land stands in the name of the petitioner and the patta has also been issued by the Revenue Officials in favour of the petitioner and there is no other material in contrary to that. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the Revenue Officials, when an application has been made to conduct the survey. A provision is also available for recording the objection, if any. The Revenue Officials have to record the objection, if any and they have to take a call as to whether conduct the survey or not and they are expected to do the same in accordance with the survey manual. In the event, if an officer is prevented from executing a statutory duty cast upon him, it is the responsibility of the police to ensure that the officer is executing their work without any fear.
In the event, if any party is having any grievance with regard to the conduct of survey, they have to workout their remedy before the civil Court and they cannot take the law into their hands. It is the duty of the respondent Police to take necessary action as against the persons, whoever take the law into their hands and prevent the Officials from conducting the survey. It is also reported that the surveyor would conduct survey within a period of one week.
11.Considering the submission of the Inspector of Police, who is present before this Court that he is prepared to provide Police protection and the submission of the Revenue Officials that the surveyor would conduct survey within a period of one week, this contempt petition is closed.
07.11.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes gns To 1.Mr.Sivaprasad, The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
2.Mr.Jeyabal, The Sub-Inspector of Police, Taluk Police Station, Devakottai, Sivagangai District.
3.The Tahsildar, Ramnagar, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
8/9
B.PUGALENDHI,J gns 07.11.2025 9/9