Madras High Court
WA(MD)/1726/2026 of K.SIVAKUMAR Vs THE THASILDAR on 28 October 2026
WA(MD) No. 1726 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 28-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN
WA(MD) No. 1726 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD010871202026}
and
C.M.P(MD)No.14712 of 2026
K.Sivakumar
S/o.Kalimuthu,
No.62E, Angalamman Sirpa Salai, Malluga Street, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Thasildar
Taluk Office,
Kumbakonam Taluk,
Thanjavur District.
2. The Town Surveyor,
Kumbakonam Town, Thanjavur District
3. The Executive Officer,
Arulmighu Santhana Gopala Krishna Swamy
Temple, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying to prefer this memorandum of grounds of writ appeal against the order passed by this Honourable Court in W.P.(MD).No.5125 of 2026 order dated 25-02-2026.
__________
( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 03:32:20 pm )
WA(MD) No. 1726 of 2026
For Petitioner(s)
:Mr.A.N.Ramanathan
For Respondent(s)
:Mr.M.P.Senthil
Government Pleader
for R1 & R2
Mr.V.Chandrasekar for R3
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.
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.Velmurugan J.) Challenging the order dated 25.02.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD) No.5125 of 2026, dismissing the writ petition, the present writ appeal has been filed by the appellant/writ petitioner.
2. Mr. M.P. Senthil, learned Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2. Mr. V. Chandrasekar, learned counsel, takes notice for the third respondent.
3. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for both sides, the writ appeal is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the respondents conducted the survey on 12.11.2025 without issuing prior notice to the appellant and the other adjoining landowners, in violation of the directions issued by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.17365 of 2025, dated 26.06.2025. It was further submitted that the survey was not conducted in __________
( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 03:32:20 pm )
WA(MD) No. 1726 of 2026 its entirety and that the alleged encroachment measuring 12 sq. m. was determined without properly fixing the boundaries of the temple tank situated in S.F. No.1476. The learned counsel also contended that the discrepancy between the earlier allegation of encroachment measuring 28 sq. m. and the subsequent allegation of 12 sq. m. demonstrated non- application of mind on the part of the respondents. Therefore, the learned counsel submitted that the impugned eviction notice, as well as the order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition, is liable to be set aside.
5. Per contra, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that notices had been issued to the appellant on two occasions and that the appellant had sought time to submit his reply. Thereafter, a third notice was issued to the appellant, informing him of the date of the survey. Pursuant to the said notice, the appellant was present at the time of the survey, which was conducted in his presence. Therefore, the learned Government Pleader contended that, having participated in the survey, the appellant could not subsequently question the same on the ground of want of notice. Accordingly, he prayed for dismissal of the writ appeal. __________
( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 03:32:20 pm )
WA(MD) No. 1726 of 2026
6. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, as well as the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent, and perused the materials available on record.
7. It is seen from the records that the grievance of the appellant is that the second respondent conducted the survey on 12.11.2025 without issuing prior notice to him and, based on the said survey, issued the impugned notice dated 11.02.2026, calling upon him to remove the alleged encroachment measuring 12 sq. m. However, the learned Government Pleader submitted that notices had been issued to the appellant on two occasions and that the appellant was present when the survey was conducted pursuant to the third notice informing him of the date of the survey.
8. In view of the above submissions and the materials available on record, we are of the considered view that the learned Single Judge was justified in dismissing the writ petition. We find no grounds warranting interference with the order under challenge. __________
( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 03:32:20 pm )
WA(MD) No. 1726 of 2026
9. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. The appellant is at liberty to approach the civil Court for appropriate relief.
(P.V.,J.) (K.K.R.K.,J.) 28-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No AM __________
( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 03:32:20 pm )
WA(MD) No. 1726 of 2026 To
1. The Thasildar Taluk Office, Kumbakonam Taluk, Thanjavur District.
2. The Town Surveyor, Kumbakonam Town, Thanjavur District __________
( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 03:32:20 pm )
WA(MD) No. 1726 of 2026 P.VELMURUGAN, J. AND K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J. AM WA(MD) No. 1726 of 2026 28-10-2026 __________
( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 03:32:20 pm )