Madras High Court
WP(MD)/29612/2026 of S.Jayaraj Vs The Commissioner of Land Adm on 14 October 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 14-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.D.SUMATHI
WP(MD) No. 29612 of 2026
and
W.M.P.(MD)No.22511 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011465412026}
S.Jayaraj
S/o.Selvamuthu Nayakar Panthuvarpatti,
Marikundu Post,
Shanmugasundarapuram Village,
Aundipatti Taluk,
Theni District - 625 512.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs.
1. The Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
2. The Secretary to Government
Revenue and Disaster Management, Chennai.
3. The District Collector,
Theni District, Theni.
4. The Sub-Collector
Periyakulam, Theni District.
5. The Tahsildar
Aundipatti Taluk, Theni District.
6. The Revenue Inspector
Aundipatti Firka, Aundipatti Taluk,
Theni District.
7. Samiraj,
S/o.Vellaiyappan Nayakar,
Panthuvarpatti Shanmugasundarapuram
Village,
Aundipatti Taluk Theni District.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the appeal petition dated 25.09.2026 preferred by the petitioner under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 on merits and in accordance with law after affording the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court and consequently direct the respondents 3 to 6 not to evict the petitioner from or demolish any structure in the land comprised in S.F.No.1669/2 and S.F.No.1669/23 Panthuvarpati Shanmugasundarapuram Village, Aundipatti Taluk, Theni District until the disposal of the said appeal petition.
For Petitioner(s) :
Mr.T.T.Nishanth
For Respondent(s):
Ms.K.R.Shivashankari,
Additional Government Pleader
for R-1 to R-6.
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 G.R.Swaminathan J.) Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 6.
2. Issuance of notice to the seventh respondent is dispensed with.
3. The writ petitioner suffered an order under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act on 27.01.2026. The petitioner filed an appeal before the District Collector, Theni District and it was also dismissed on 31.08.2026. The petitioner has filed this writ petition claiming that since he has filed further appeal under Section 10(c) of the Act, coercive action may be put on hold till the disposal of the said appeal.
4. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the petition mentioned land has been used as a pathway by the general public and that the petitioner has obstructed the said passage by erecting fence. The said fence as well as the stones put up by the petitioner have been removed two days back. According to her, nothing survives for further adjudication in this writ petition.
5. We carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record.
6. Let us consider the first plea put forth by the petitioner that he has moved the Commissioner of Land Administration by filing an appeal under Section 10(c) of the Act. Section 10(c) of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 reads as follows:-
“ 10. Appeal- An appeal shall lie-
(a) …
(aa) …
(b) ...
(c) to the Commissioner of Land Administration from any decision or order of a District Collector passed otherwise than on appeal.” An appeal will lie before the Commissioner of Land Administration only against the original order of the District Collector. Against an appellate order passed by the District Collector under Section 10(a), no appeal will lie under Section 10(c) of the Act. The so-called appeal filed by the petitioner before the Commissioner of Land Administration is patently not maintainable.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner fairly concedes that he ought not to have filed any petition before the Commissioner of Land Administration. But he should have preferred a revision before the Government under Section 10-A(c) of the Act.
8. We grant liberty to the petitioner to do so. If such revision petition is filed within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, it should be entertained by the second respondent herein without reference to limitation and disposed of on merits and in accordance with law.
9. Though the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the petition mentioned land is a public pathway, there are no revenue entries to that effect. Therefore, it will be in the fitness of things to permit the petitioner to exhaust the revisional remedy. Till the revision petition that is to be filed by the petitioner is disposed of by the Government, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner in respect of the subject matter. If the petitioner fails to file such revision petition within two weeks, the benefit of this order will not be available to him. This writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (G.R.S.,J.) (M.D.S.,J.) 14-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No PMU
To
1. The Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
2. The Secretary to Government Revenue and Disaster Management, Chennai.
3. The District Collector Theni District, Theni.
4. The Sub-Collector Periyakulam, Theni District.
5. The Tahsildar Aundipatti Taluk, Theni District.
6. The Revenue Inspector Aundipatti Firka, Aundipatti Taluk, Theni District.
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. AND M.D.SUMATHI, J. PMU WP(MD) No. 29612 of 2026 14-10-2026