Madras High Court
WP(MD)/28931/2026 of R.Veeran Vs The District Collector on 6 October 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 06.10.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE M.D.SUMATHI
WP(MD) NO. 28931 of
{CNR: HCMD011436702026}
Case QR
R.Veeran
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District
Virudhunagar.
2.The Tahsildar
Tiruchuli Taluk
Virudhunagar District.
3.The Revenue Inspector
Narikudi Firka
Tiruchuli Taluk
Virudhunagar District.
4.The Village Administrative Officer
Athithanendhal Revenue Village
Tiruchuli Taluk
Virudhunagar District.
... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings / order Na.Ka.Aa1/1122/2026 dated 24.09.2026 issued by the 2nd respondent the Tahsildar Tiruchulli Taluk, under section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act 1905, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property comprised in Survey No.544/13 and 544/66
situated at Neduganendhal Village, Athithanendhal Revenue Village, Tiruchuli Taluk, Virudhunagar District and to maintain status quo.
For Petitioner
: Mr.S.Balaji
For Respondents : Mr.M.S.Parthiban
Government Advocate (Civil Side)
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
(By G.R.Swaminathan, J.) Heard both sides.
2. The writ petitioner challenges the order passed under Section 6 of the Land Encroachment Act, 1905.
3. The petitioner's counsel contended that the impugned order was not preceded by notice under Section 7 of the Act.
4. The learned Government Advocate rebuts the said contention. He produced the copy of the notice dated 18.06.2026.
5. However, there is no proof that it was actually served on the petitioner. Be that as it may, the petitioner had already moved the District Collector under Section 10 of the Act. We direct the respondents to keep the impugned eviction order in abeyance till the disposal of the appeal by the District Collector.
6. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. (G.R.S. J.,) & (M.D.S. J.,) 06.10.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No rmi
To:
1. The District Collector, Virudhunagar District Virudhunagar.
2. The Tahsildar Tiruchuli Taluk Virudhunagar District.
3. The Revenue Inspector Narikudi Firka Tiruchuli Taluk Virudhunagar District.
4. The Village Administrative Officer Athithanendhal Revenue Village Tiruchuli Taluk Virudhunagar District.
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. and M.D.SUMATHI
, J.
rmi W.P.(MD)No.28931 of 2026
06.10.2026