Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, V. Jeyaram, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, seeking a Writ of Mandamus to restrain the respondents (District Collector, Tahsildar, and Revenue Inspector of Theni District) from proceeding with a notice dated 11.12.2024 issued under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. The petitioner had already preferred a statutory appeal under Section 10 of the Act against the eviction order and had also moved an interim stay application before the first respondent (District Collector). The court noted that since the petitioner had invoked the statutory remedy under the Act and the same was pending, entertaining the writ petition for similar relief was impermissible. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed without any order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Alternative Remedy - Writ of Mandamus - Maintainability - Petitioner challenged eviction notice under Section 6 of Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 by way of writ petition, despite having already filed a statutory appeal under Section 10 of the Act and an interim stay application before the appellate authority - Court held that entertaining the writ petition for similar relief which is pending before the appellate authority is impermissible - Dismissed the writ petition (Paras 3-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ petition seeking to forbear respondents from proceeding with eviction notice under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 is maintainable when the petitioner has already preferred a statutory appeal under Section 10 of the Act and an interim stay application before the appellate authority.
Final Decision
The writ petition was dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Exhaustion of statutory remedy
- Writ of Mandamus not maintainable when alternative remedy available
- Section 6 and Section 10 of Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act
- 1905
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 397
M.S.Ramesh, A.D.Maria Clete
For Petitioner: Mr.R.Maheswaran; For Respondents: Mr.J.Ashok, Additional Government Pleader
1. The District Collector, Collector Office, Theni; 2. The Tahsildar, Andipatti, Theni District; 3. The Revenue Inspector, Mayiladumparai, Andipatti Taluk, Theni District
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus to forbear respondents from proceeding with eviction notice under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus to restrain the respondents from proceeding with the notice dated 11.12.2024 issued under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 until disposal of his statutory appeal dated 14.12.2024 and interim stay petition dated 18.12.2024 under Section 10 of the Act.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was issued an eviction notice under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, and he filed a statutory appeal under Section 10 of the Act along with an interim stay application. He then filed the writ petition seeking similar relief.
Previous Decisions
The petitioner had already preferred an appeal under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 against the eviction order and had moved an interim stay application before the first respondent.
Issues
Whether a writ petition seeking to forbear respondents from proceeding with eviction notice under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 is maintainable when the petitioner has already preferred a statutory appeal under Section 10 of the Act and an interim stay application before the appellate authority.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued for a Writ of Mandamus to stay eviction proceedings pending disposal of his statutory appeal and interim stay application.
Respondents opposed the writ petition, likely contending that the petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy.
Ratio Decidendi
When a party has already invoked a statutory remedy under an Act and the same is pending, entertaining a writ petition for similar relief is impermissible. The court should not entertain a writ petition when an alternative efficacious remedy is available and has been availed.
Judgment Excerpts
Admittedly, the petitioner herein had preferred an appeal under Section 10 of 'the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905' ... against the eviction order passed under Section 6 of the Act and has also move an interim application seeking for stay of the eviction proceedings.
While the petitioner herein had invoked the statutory appeal under the Act and the same is pending, entertaining the present Writ Petition for a similar relief which is before the appellate authority is impermissible.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Procedural History
The petitioner was issued an eviction notice under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 on 11.12.2024. He filed a statutory appeal under Section 10 of the Act on 14.12.2024 and an interim stay petition on 18.12.2024 before the first respondent. Subsequently, he filed the present writ petition on an unspecified date. The writ petition was taken up for final disposal at the admission stage by consent of both sides and dismissed on 06.01.2025.
Acts & Sections
- Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905: Section 6, Section 10
- Constitution of India: Article 226
