Madras High Court
WP/5999/2026 of Murugan Vs The District Collector on 15 October 2026
WP No. 5999 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.RAJESH VIVEKANANTHAN
WP No. 5999 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA010289382026}
Murugan
S/o. Subbaiah Gounder,
Door NO.553, Thayirpallam Pudur,
Ikkaraithathappalli, Sathyamangalam Taluk, Erode District -638 451
..Petitioner
Vs
1. The District Collector
District Collectorate,
Erode -638 011.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer
Revenue Divisional office,
Gobichettipalayam, -638 452
3. The Tahsildar
Taluk Office,
Sathyamangalam-638 402
4. Thirumappa Gounder,
S/o. Ramasamy Gounder,
Thayirpallam Pudur,
Ikkaraithathappalli,
Sathyamangalam Taluk,
Erode District-638 451
( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 04:36:57 pm )
WP No. 5999 of 2026
5. Rajan
S/o. Thirumappa Gounder,
Thayirpallam Pudur, Ikkaraithathappalli, Sathyamangalam Taluk, Erode District-638 451
6. Radhika
D/o. Thirumappa Gounder,
Thayirpallam Pudur, Ikkaraithathappalli, Sathyamangalam Taluk, Erode District-638 451
..Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to remove the encroachments made by the Respondents 4 to 6 on the cart track situated in Survey No.269/3, Ikkaraithathappalli Village, Sathyamangalam Taluk, Gobichettipalayam within a stipulated period as fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.S.Parthasarathy
For Respondent(s):
Mr.R. Hashwanth
Government Advocate For R 1-3
Ms.G.Sumithra For RR4 and 5
No appearance – for R6
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The present writ of mandamus has been instituted for directing the respondents 1 to 3 to remove the encroachments made by the Respondents 4 to 6 on the cart track situated in Survey No.269/3, Ikkaraithathappalli Village,
( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 04:36:57 pm )
WP No. 5999 of 2026
Sathyamangalam Taluk, Gobichettipalayam within a stipulated period as fixed by this Court.
2. The Tahsildar, Sathyamangalam Taluk filed a status report stating as follows: “ 5. I respectfully submit on the application of the writ petitioner, the Firka Surveyor surveyed the field on 26.05.2026 and submitted the report. The report reveals that “the land bearing R.S.No.269/3 is recorded as Ryot Punjai – 0.07.00 Hectares in the name of the Thirumappa Gounder and 5 others vide Patta No.550. In the Remarks column, it was recorded as ‘Nilaviyal Vandipathai’. The land was surveyed on 22.05.2026. During the survey, it was found that the portion of the Nilaviyal Vandipathai has been encroaching by Thirumappa Gounder by planting 8 coconut trees. Among the coconut trees, 3 coconut trees are aged about 35 to 40 years and remaining 5 trees are aged about 5 to 10 years. The Nilaviyal Vandipathai is being six persons including Thirumappa Gounder and the writ petitioner Murugan. Except this Nilaviyal Vandipathai there is no path to access their land.
6. I respectfully submit that according to the RSO-26
(15) Encroachments on plan-marked details :- A plan marked channel or pathway running in a patta land is a Government land”. Though the land was surrounded with coconut trees, those trees are of No hindrance to the free movement of vehicles those pass through plan marked channel with 4 mt
( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 04:36:57 pm )
WP No. 5999 of 2026
width at the front portion and 2.4 mt in the middle portion of the pathway.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondents 4 to 6 are causing obstruction for very usage of public pathway ie., Nilaviyal Vandi Paathai. However, the learned Government Advocate would submit that coconut trees planted are not causing obstruction for the peaceful usage of public pathway. To establish the said fact, he submitted a photograph taken on 04.10.2026 at 2.25 PM. The said photo would show that the pathway has been maintained for public usage and there is no obstruction.
4. Since the pathway is being maintained as public pathway for common usage of all the persons to reach their agricultural lands in consonance with RSO 26 Clause 15, no further intervention is required. However, it is made clear that the pathway is to be maintained free from encroachments and for the benefit of the people to reach their respective agricultural lands. With the above observations, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. (S.M.S.,J.) (R.R.V.,J.) 15-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No KST
( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 04:36:57 pm )
WP No. 5999 of 2026
To
1. The District Collector District Collectorate, Erode -638 011.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Revenue Divisional office, Gobichettipalayam, -638 452
3. The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Sathyamangalam-638 402
( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 04:36:57 pm )
WP No. 5999 of 2026
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J. AND R.RAJESH VIVEKANANTHAN J. KST WP No. 5999 of 2026 15-10-2026
( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 04:36:57 pm )