Madras High Court Directs Removal of Encroachment in Writ of Mandamus — Petitioner's Wife Found to Have Encroached Beyond Granted Patta Land. Court Orders Authorities to Act Against Unauthorized Construction Under Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.

High Court: Madras High Court
  • 95
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, A. Mathew, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 to 7 to remove the encroachment made by the eighth respondent, P. Rathinasamy, in Survey Field No. 43/1, Anamalai Hills Village, Valparai Taluk, Coimbatore District, and to demolish the unauthorized construction put up thereon at 9/253H, Kakkan Colony, Valparai. The Joint Director of Town and Country Planning filed a counter affidavit stating that a notice had been issued on 15.12.2025 to the eighth respondent directing him to provide approval details and ownership documents within 7 days, failing which action would be taken under Sections 56 and 57 of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971. The Tahsildar, Valparai, also initiated action to identify the land encroachment. A status report from the Tahsildar revealed that the petitioner's wife, Mrs. Jodhis, had been granted HSD Patta No. 65/1417 in site no. 46 for an extent of 60 square meters in SF No. 43/1, and she had obtained approval for construction from the Valparai Municipality. However, during a survey by the Taluk Deputy Surveyor, it was found that she had encroached on the southern side by 1.4 meters east-west and on the eastern side by 1 meter south-north, totaling an excess of 40 square meters. The court, after hearing the submissions, directed the respondents 1 to 7 to take appropriate action against the encroachment and unauthorized construction in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Encroachment - Article 226 of Constitution of India - Petitioner sought direction to remove encroachment by eighth respondent on SF 43/1, Anamalai Hills Village - Court found that petitioner's wife had been granted HSD Patta for 60 sq meters but had encroached an additional 40 sq meters - Held that the authorities must take appropriate action against the encroachment and unauthorized construction in accordance with law (Paras 1-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the respondents should be directed to remove the encroachment and unauthorized construction made by the eighth respondent on the petitioner's land.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court directed respondents 1 to 7 to take appropriate action against the encroachment and unauthorized construction in accordance with law, within eight weeks from receipt of copy of the order. The writ petition was disposed of.

Law Points

  • Writ of Mandamus
  • Encroachment
  • Unauthorized Construction
  • Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act
  • 1971
  • Sections 56 and 57
  • Article 226 of Constitution of India
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (MAD) (04) 20

Writ Petition No.45299 of 2025

2026-04-29

S. M. Subramaniam, K. Surender

Mr.A.R. Sakthivel (for petitioner), Mr.T.Arun Kumar (Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R6)

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition seeking removal of encroachment and demolition of unauthorized construction.

Remedy Sought

Direction to respondents 1 to 7 to remove encroachment by eighth respondent and demolish unauthorized construction.

Filing Reason

Alleged encroachment by eighth respondent on petitioner's land in SF 43/1, Anamalai Hills Village.

Previous Decisions

Notice issued to eighth respondent on 15.12.2025; survey revealed petitioner's wife had encroached beyond her patta land.

Issues

Whether the respondents should be directed to remove the encroachment and unauthorized construction made by the eighth respondent.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner sought direction to remove encroachment and unauthorized construction. Respondents 1 to 7 filed counter stating notice issued to eighth respondent and action initiated.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the authorities must take appropriate action against encroachment and unauthorized construction in accordance with law, based on the findings of the survey and the notice issued under the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.

Judgment Excerpts

This writ petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the respondents 1 to 7 to remove the encroachment made by the eighth respondent. The Joint Director, Directorate of Town and Country Planning, filed a counter affidavit stating that a notice had been issued on 15.12.2025 to the eighth respondent directing him to provide approval details of the constructions and ownership documents within 7 days... Paragraph No.9 of the status report filed by the Tahsildar, Valparai, reads as under: '...it is found that she had encroached on the southern side on east – west 1.4 meter excess as well on eastern side South North 1 Meter in excess which works out 40 square metre.'

Procedural History

Writ petition filed under Article 226; counter affidavit filed by Joint Director; status report filed by Tahsildar; court heard submissions and disposed of petition with directions.

Acts & Sections

  • Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971: 56, 57
  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Revision Against Conviction for Criminal Breach of Trust by Public Servant. Conviction under Section 409 IPC for misappropriation of Rs.450 copying fees upheld as prosecution proved entrustment and dishonest misappropriati...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Testamentary Suit for Letters of Administration; Will Not Validly Executed Due to Suspicious Circumstances and Undue Influence. Holograph Will Dated 20 March 1980 Not Proved Under Section 69 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872; P...