Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Erumapalayam Kongu Nagar Samuga represented by its President S. Perumal @ Raja, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras High Court challenging an interdepartmental communication dated 10.11.2025 issued by the Tahsildar, Hasthampatti, Salem (second respondent) to the Inspector of Police, Kichipalayam Police Station, Salem. The communication sought police protection for removal of encroachment pursuant to a final notice under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act. The petitioner contended that the District Collector had already passed an order on 17.03.2025 under Section 10 of the Act, and the Tahsildar was bound by that order. The court, comprising Justice S.M. Subramaniam and Justice K. Surender, observed that the impugned communication was merely an interdepartmental letter and not a quasi-judicial order amenable to writ jurisdiction. The court held that if any action was taken contrary to the District Collector's order, the petitioner could approach the District Collector for appropriate remedy. With this liberty, the writ petition was disposed of without costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Maintainability - Interdepartmental Communication - Challenge to letter from Tahsildar to Inspector of Police seeking police protection for removal of encroachment - Held that such communication is not amenable to writ jurisdiction as it is an internal administrative communication; petitioner directed to approach District Collector if any action contrary to his order under Section 10 of Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 is taken (Paras 1-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ petition challenging an interdepartmental communication between Tahsildar and Police for providing protection for removal of encroachment is maintainable when an order under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act has been passed by the District Collector.
Final Decision
The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the District Collector if any action has been taken contrary to the order passed by the District Collector. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Law Points
- Writ of certiorari not maintainable against interdepartmental communication
- alternative remedy before District Collector available
Case Details
S.M. Subramaniam, K. Surender
Mr. R.Nalliyappan for petitioner, Mr.T.Arunkumar (Additional Government Pleader) for R1 and R2, Mr.K.Vasantha Nayagan for Mr.L.Ramanathan for R3
Erumapalayam Kongu Nagar Samuga, Represented By Its President, S. Perumal @ Raja
1. The District Collector, Salem, 2. The Thasildar, Hasthampatti, Salem, 3. V.Vijayan
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India challenging interdepartmental communication for police protection to remove encroachment.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought issuance of writ of certiorari to quash the proceedings of the second respondent dated 10.11.2025 in Na.Ka.1628/2025 (A2).
Filing Reason
Petitioner challenged the Tahsildar's letter to Inspector of Police seeking police protection for removal of encroachment, alleging it was contrary to the District Collector's order under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act.
Previous Decisions
District Collector passed an order on 17.03.2025 under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act.
Issues
Whether the impugned interdepartmental communication is amenable to writ jurisdiction.
Whether the petitioner has an alternative remedy before the District Collector.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel submitted that the District Collector passed an order on 17.03.2025 under Section 10 of the Act, and the Tahsildar is bound by that order.
Ratio Decidendi
An interdepartmental communication between the Tahsildar and Police for providing protection for removal of encroachment is not a quasi-judicial order and is not amenable to writ jurisdiction. The petitioner has an alternative remedy to approach the District Collector if any action is taken contrary to his order under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act.
Judgment Excerpts
The present writ petition has been instituted challenging the interdepartmental communication between the Tahsildar, Salem and Inspector of Police, Kichipalayam Police Station, Salem.
If at all any action has been taken contrary to the order passed by District Collector, it is left open to the petitioner to approach the District Collector for appropriate remedy.
Procedural History
The writ petition was filed on an unspecified date challenging the Tahsildar's communication dated 10.11.2025. The third respondent was impleaded vide order dated 21.11.2025 in WMP No.50385/2025. The petition was heard and disposed of on 17.03.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905: Section 10
- Constitution of India: Article 226
