WP/42182/2026 of Dhandapani Vs The District collector on 14 October 2026

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The order passed by the District Collector, Tirupur dated 04.09.2026, under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 is under challenge in the present proceedings.

2. The petitioner states that he had purchased a house site in Site No. 12 at R.S.No. 299/2B in RKP Nagar, Chitravuthanpalayam Village, Dharapuram Taluk, Tirupur District. As per petitioner, it is an approved layout. He purchased the plot vide sale deed dated 12.09.2011, registered as Document No. 10039 of 2011. The petitioner constructed a house and residing there along with his family.

3. The fourth respondent, who purchased a constructed house at Site No. 4, Meenakshi Nagar in R.S. No. 299/3 has given a complaint, as if the petitioner raised a wall between Site No. 6 and Site No. 12 in RKP Nagar, thereby obstructing the public pathway.

4. The fourth respondent filed W.P. No. 32324 of 2025 and this Court passed an order on 29.08.2025 directing the authorities to conduct an enquiry and dispose of the complaint filed by the fourth respondent.

( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 01:07:53 pm )

2026:MHC:4324 WP No. 42182 of 2026

The revenue authorities conducted survey, identified pathway and held that petitioner has encroached upon the public pathway.

5. Consequently, enforcement action was initiated under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. Section 7 notice issued and after affording opportunity to the petitioner, final notice under Section 6 issued. The petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 10 of the Act.

6. The District Collector conducted an elaborate enquiry by affording opportunity to the parties and passed the impugned order vide proceedings dated 04.09.2026. The findings of the District Collector would show that the encroachments are identified. As per the plan marked detail, it is a public pathway. Therefore, the Collector also affirmed the order of the Tahsildar for removal of encroachment in the public pathway.

7. A compound wall was constructed in the public pathway. The petitioner has constructed his house in the house site purchased vide sale deed dated 12.09.2011. The compound wall constructed by the layout promoter was identified as an encroachment in public pathway as per plan marked detail. Thus, District Collector also confirmed that the

( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 01:07:53 pm )

2026:MHC:4324 WP No. 42182 of 2026

compound wall constructed by the layout promoter in the public pathway is to be removed.

8. Revenue Standing Order 26 Clause 15 speaks about encroachments on plan-marked detail. Accordingly, a plan marked channel or pathway running in a patta land is a Government land. Eviction of encroachment in such lands need to be invoked only in cases where the encroacher has interfered with the plan marked detail so as to close its entrance to and exit from its lands.

9. In the present case, before forming layout, pathway was earmarked in the plan marked detail. As per the petitioner, the layout promoter constructed a wall in the pathway which caused obstruction for usage of pathway by the public. Thus, the complaint filed by the fourth respondent was entertained, an enquiry was conducted in detail with reference to the revenue documents and the District Collector held that the compound wall was constructed in the public pathway and accordingly directed for removal of the encroachment.

10. The petitioner has admittedly not claimed any ownership in respect of the compound wall constructed in the pathway. The contention of the petitioner is that the compound wall is not causing any

( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 01:07:53 pm )

2026:MHC:4324 WP No. 42182 of 2026

obstruction to the fourth respondent.

11. May that as it may. Admittedly, the compound wall has been constructed in the public pathway and if at all the petitioner intends to protect his plot, he has to put up compound wall in his plot, which he has purchased as per sale deed dated 12.09.2011.

12. In view of the fact that petitioner has not claimed any ownership in respect of the said portion of the pathway or the compound wall constructed by the layout promoter, and further the revenue authorities as well as the appellate authority/District Collector found that pathway is in existence as per the plan marked detail and compound wall was constructed obstructing the public pathway, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order impugned passed by the District Collector which is in consonance with the Revenue Standing Order and passed after conducting a detailed enquiry.

13. Consequently, writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed. (S.M.S.,J.) (R.R.V.,J.) 14-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No GD

( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 01:07:53 pm )

2026:MHC:4324 WP No. 42182 of 2026

To

1. The District collector Tiruppur District Tiruppur

2. The Tahsildar Dharapuram Taluk Tiruppur District

3. the Block Development officer Village Panchayats Dharapuram Taluk Tiruppur District

( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 01:07:53 pm )

2026:MHC:4324 WP No. 42182 of 2026

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND R.RAJESH VIVEKANANTHAN, J. GD WP No. 42182 of 2026 14-10-2026

( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 01:07:53 pm )