O.Indra v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN and W.M.P.(MD)No.22445, 22447 &22448 of 2025 O.Indra ... Petitioner /Vs./
1. The District Collector, Collectorate, Pudukottai District.
2. The District Revenue Officer, Office of DRO, Pudukottai District.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of RDO, Illuppur, Pudukottai District.
4. The Tahsildar, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukottai District.
... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Petition - filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records 1/4
relating to the impugned notice dated 12.12.2024 issued by the 4th respondent and quash the same as illegal and direct the 2 to 4 respondents to issue joint patta in respect of property in S.No 662/1, Kulathur Village, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukottai District extent about 48 sq.mts by considering the representation dated 06.10.2025 within stipulated time fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.R.Manimaran For Respondents : Mr.D.Sadiq Raja Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.) The petitioner has challenged an order passed under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, ('Act'), which is dated 12.12.2024.
2. There has been rank suppression of fact by the petitioner, insofar as that very order (relating to S.No.662/1 and addressed to Arumugam) has been the subject matter of challenge in WP(MD)No.101 of 2025. Arumugam is none other than the brother of Indra, the petitioner herein. That Section 6 order, which is dated 12.12.2024 was 2/4
preceded by a notice under Section 7 of the Act dated 21.11.2024.
3. From a reading of the affidavit filed in WP(MD)No.101 of 2025, which is part of the records produced by Mr.D.Sadiq Raja, learned Additional Government Pleader before us, it appears that the notice was also subject to challenge by Arumugam. Thereafter, the same order as impugned before us was also challenged at the instance of Arumugam.
4. There is no disclosure of the aforesaid facts in the present writ petition. The petitioner has merely challenged the same impugned order in the present writ petition, and we are categoric that the same must be dismissed on account of laches as well as suppression of facts.
5. This writ petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) payable to the High Court Legal Services Committee attached to this Bench within one week from today. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. [A.S.M.J.,] & [C.K.J.,] 15.10.2025 NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No sm Note: Registry should intimate the Bench in Chambers in regard to the compliance of remittance of costs.
3/4
DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.
AND C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
sm To
1. The District Collector, Collectorate, Pudukottai District.
2. The District Revenue Officer, Office of DRO, Pudukottai District.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of RDO, Illuppur, Pudukottai District.
4. The Tahsildar, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukottai District.
Order made in Dated:
15.10.2025 4/4