Case Note & Summary
The present writ petition was filed by Selvi and Saravanan challenging a notice dated 20.02.2025 issued by the Section Officer, Public Works Department, Water Resources Organization, Red Hills Irrigation Section, which was affixed to a tree opposite the petitioners' house. The notice pertained to the removal of encroachments from Korattur lake, a water body. The petitioners sought a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the notice and to direct the District Collector to consider their representation dated 18.02.2025 not to evict them from their houses in survey no.331/10A3A at Ondiveeran Street, Korattur village. The court noted that the notice was a show cause notice and that no writ against such a notice is entertainable. The court observed that enforcement actions were initiated pursuant to an order of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court dated 26.04.2024 in WP.No.11909 of 2024. The learned Special Government Pleader submitted that all encroachments in the water body had been removed except six houses involved in the present writ petition. Pursuant to interim directions, a joint committee had conducted an inspection on 20.07.2024 and submitted a report identifying encroachments. However, due to an interim order of status quo, the authorities were unable to evict the encroachers. The learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the petitioners had certain rights and that another Division Bench had passed an order on 09.10.2024 in WP.No.29583 of 2024, but that writ petition was closed. The Special Government Pleader clarified that the encroachments pertained only to Korattur lake in S.No.813 and that no eviction process would be carried out in respect of S.No.331/10A3A. The court held that the writ petition was not maintainable and directed the petitioners to submit their explanation along with documents to the authorities within two weeks. The authorities were directed to consider the explanation and pass orders on merits, and the status quo order shall not be an impediment for the authorities to proceed in accordance with law. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Maintainability of Writ Against Show Cause Notice - A writ petition challenging a notice for removal of encroachment from a water body is not maintainable as the aggrieved person must first submit an explanation along with documents to the authorities, enabling them to consider and take a final decision. (Paras 1-6) B) Environmental Law - Water Bodies - Removal of Encroachments - Enforcement actions for removal of encroachments from a lake were initiated pursuant to a Division Bench order dated 26.04.2024 in WP.No.11909 of 2024. The court held that the petitioners must submit their explanation to the authorities, who shall consider the same and pass orders on merits, and the status quo order shall not be an impediment. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ petition challenging a notice for removal of encroachment from a water body is maintainable without first submitting an explanation to the authorities.
Final Decision
The writ petition was disposed of with directions that the petitioners may submit their explanation along with documents to the authorities within two weeks. The authorities shall consider the explanation and pass orders on merits in accordance with law. The status quo order shall not be an impediment for the authorities to proceed.
Law Points
- Writ petition against show cause notice not maintainable
- Remedy of submitting explanation before authorities
- Encroachment on water bodies must be removed
- Status quo order does not prevent eviction after due process
