Madras High Court Dismisses Petitioner's Writ Seeking Stay of Eviction Due to Pending Statutory Appeal Under Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. Invocation of Alternative Remedy Under Section 10 of the Act Bars Parallel Writ Proceedings Under Article 226.

High Court: Madras High Court
  • 54
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Rasu, 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, along with an interim stay petition, before the first respondent (District Collector). The court noted that the petitioner had invoked the statutory remedy and the appeal was pending. The court held that entertaining a writ petition for the same relief while the statutory appeal is pending is impermissible. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Alternative Remedy - Maintainability of Writ Petition - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Where a petitioner has already availed the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 against an eviction order under Section 6 of the Act, and the appeal is pending, entertaining a writ petition for the same relief is impermissible. The High Court dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner cannot simultaneously pursue two parallel remedies. (Paras 3-4)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable when the petitioner has already invoked the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and the same is pending.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petition was dismissed. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Alternative remedy
  • Exhaustion of statutory remedies
  • Writ jurisdiction not to be entertained when statutory appeal pending
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 398

W.P.(MD)No.31473 of 2024

2025-01-06

M.S.Ramesh, A.D.Maria Clete

Mr.R.Maheswaran (for petitioner), Mr.J.Ashok, Additional Government Pleader (for respondents)

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 restrain 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 forbearing 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 the statutory appeal dated 14.12.2024 and interim stay petition dated 18.12.2024 preferred 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 had filed a statutory appeal under Section 10 of the Act, but sought interim protection through writ petition.

Issues

Whether a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable when the petitioner has already invoked the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and the appeal is pending.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued for stay of eviction proceedings pending disposal of statutory appeal. Respondents opposed the writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy.

Ratio Decidendi

When a petitioner has already availed the statutory remedy of appeal under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and the appeal is pending, entertaining a writ petition for the same relief is impermissible. The High Court will not exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 when an alternative efficacious remedy is available and has been invoked.

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 filed a writ petition on an unspecified date. The court took up the petition for final disposal at the admission stage by consent of both sides. The petition was dismissed on 06.01.2025.

Acts & Sections

  • Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905: Section 6, Section 10
  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Dismisses Petitioner's Writ Seeking Stay of Eviction Due to Pending Statutory Appeal Under Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. Invocation of Alternative Remedy Under Section 10 of the Act Bars Parallel Writ Proceedings Under Art...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Enhances Maintenance for Wife and Children in Family Dispute — Husband's Revision Dismissed. Court Holds That Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC Must Be Adequate to Prevent Destitution and Considers Husband's Income and Obli...