Case Note & Summary
The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was filed challenging proceedings dated 06.10.2025 issued by the Assistant Engineer, Water Resources Organisation, Public Works Department. The petitioners, residents of apartments in S.Kolathur Village, sought to quash a notice issued under Form III of Rule 6(1) of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Rules, 2007, and to direct a re-survey of the land. The impugned notice alleged encroachments in S.No.376 of Keelkattalai surplus canal in Madipakkam 2 Village, Sholinganallur Circle, Chennai District. After the notice was issued, a fresh survey was conducted by the Tahsildar, Sholinganallur, in the presence of the petitioners and other alleged encroachers. The Tahsildar submitted a report dated 24.11.2025 to the Assistant Engineer confirming the encroachments. The Court observed that since a fresh survey had been conducted and the encroachment was established, no further consideration of the petitioners' grounds was warranted. It was held that if the petitioners had any claim of right, they must approach the competent forum. The Court emphasised that encroachments in a water body must be evicted without impediment. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed, and the authorities were directed to complete the enforcement action, including demolition of constructions, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of the order. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Judicial Review of Eviction Proceedings - Encroachment on Water Body - Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Rules, 2007, Rule 6(1), Form III - The petitioners challenged a notice dated 06.10.2025 alleging encroachment in S.No.376 of Keelkattalai surplus canal. The Court noted that a fresh survey by the Tahsildar confirmed the encroachment and held that no further consideration was required; if the petitioners claim any right, they must approach the competent forum. Held that the writ petition is dismissed and the eviction action must be completed within twelve weeks (Paras 1-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the eviction notice dated 06.10.2025 issued under the Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Rules, 2007, is valid and should be quashed, and whether the court should direct a resurvey
Final Decision
Writ Petition dismissed. No costs. Enforcement action directed to be completed within twelve weeks.
Law Points
- Encroachments in water bodies must be evicted
- courts uphold enforcement action
- alternative remedy lies before competent forum
Case Details
2026 LawText (MAD) (03) 92
WP No. 41422 of 2025 and WMP Nos.46387, 46389, 46392 of 2025 & WMP No. 10804 of 2026
S.M. Subramaniam, K. Surender
S.R.Shanmugadas, M.L.Ramesh, P.Sathish
V.R.Sakthivel, J. Sarala Grace, J. Samuel Rathnaraj, Ramesh Chandra Guntireddy, S.Sasikumar
The Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Water Resources Department; The District Collector, Chennai; Tahsildar, Sholinganallur, Chennai; Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Tiruvallur; Assistant Engineer, Water Resources Department, Krishna Drinking Water Scheme Division 3 Part II, (Tiruvallur)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 challenging eviction notice for encroachment on water body and seeking quashing of notice and resurvey
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought to quash proceedings dated 06.10.2025 and consequential notice under Form III of Rule 6(1) of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Rules, 2007, and to direct resurvey of the land
Filing Reason
The 5th respondent issued a notice dated 06.10.2025 identifying encroachments in S.No.376 of Keelkattalai surplus canal
Issues
Whether the eviction notice dated 06.10.2025 issued under the Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Rules, 2007, is valid and should be quashed, and whether the court should direct a resurvey
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners contended that the notice was issued without proper survey and sought re-survey of the land.
Respondents submitted that a fresh survey was conducted in the presence of the petitioners and encroachments were confirmed by the Tahsildar's report.
Ratio Decidendi
Where encroachments on water bodies are confirmed by a fresh survey, the Court will not interfere and will direct eviction; if any claim of right exists, petitioners must approach the competent forum.
Judgment Excerpts
The authorities, during the course of inspection, identified encroachments in S.No.376 of Keelkattalai surplus canal in Madipakkam 2 Village, Sholinganallur Circle, Chennai District.
After conducting survey, the Tahsildar, Sholinganallur, identified the encroachments and submitted a report to the Assistant Engineer, Water Resources Organisation, in proceedings dated 24.11.2025.
Since a fresh survey has been conducted by the Revenue Tahsildar and a report has been submitted to the Assistant Engineer, Water Resources Organisation, no further consideration needs to be undertaken in respect of the grounds raised by the petitioners.
If at all the petitioners claim any right, they have to approach the competent forum.
As far as the Water Resources Organisation, Public Works Department, is concerned, it is encroachments in the water body. Thus, there is no impediment for evicting the encroachers by demolishing the construction made encroaching upon the water body.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed the writ petition after issuance of notice on 06.10.2025. The court considered the matter after a fresh survey report was submitted on 24.11.2025. The writ petition was dismissed on 16.03.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Rules, 2007: Rule 6(1), Form III
