M.S.Shahul Hameed vs The District Collector
2023 Latest Caselaw 6697 Mad

                                                                                    W.P.No.18137 of 2023

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                      DATED : 21.06.2023

                                                           CORAM

                              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                                  W.P.No.18137 of 2023


                     M.S.Shahul Hameed                                                  ... Petitioner

                                                              Vs.

                     1. The District Collector,
                        Nagapattinam.

                     2. The Thasildhar,
                        Thirukuvalai,
                        Nagapattinam District.

                     3. The Surveyor,
                        Thirukuvalai,
                        Nagapattinam District.                                      ... Respondents

                     Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
                     to issue Writ of Mandamus, directing to consider the petitioner's
                     representation dated 04.04.2023.


                                     For Petitioner            :    Mr. S.Prakash

                                     For Respondents           :    Mr. S.Ravichandran,
                                                                    Additional Government Pleader



                     Page 1 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                         W.P.No.18137 of 2023


                                                            ORDER

The relief sought for in the writ petition is to direct Respondents to

consider the representation dated 04.04.2023 made by the petitioner.

2. The issues raised in the present writ petition were adjudicated by

this Court in a batch of writ petitions in W.P.No.37519 of 2016 & etc.,

batch, and a judgment was delivered on 19.06.2023 and the relevant

paragraphs of the judgment are extracted hereunder:

“36. Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure

unambiguously contemplates that “The Courts shall have

jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits

of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly

barred”.

37. Therefore, a special enactment has no relevance

with reference to a right of the parties to approach the

competent Civil Court of law to resolve all nature of civil

disputes including boundary dispute, survey dispute, title

dispute, ownership or otherwise. Therefore, neither the

parties nor the authorities need to create an impression

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.18137 of 2023

that in the event of boundary dispute, the parties have to

approach the authorities at the first instance. It is not

required that the aggrieved persons, in the event of

boundary dispute has to approach the authorities for fixing

the boundary, they are at liberty to approach the Civil

Court of law under Section 9 of the Code of Civil

Procedure, which is unambiguous in this regard.

38. Submitting an application for fixing boundary is

an option available to the aggrieved persons. Once an

application is filed, whether the application is

entertainable under the provisions of the Act is to be

determined by the authorities and only if it is falling within

the ambit of the Act, then alone the survey or fixing of

boundary is to be undertaken. Even in this case, the

authorities are bound to relegate the parties to the

competent Civil Court of law under Section 14 of the Act.

39. It is contended by the petitioner that the

authorities are making certain findings regarding the

title, ownership in their order, while rejecting the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.18137 of 2023

applications. Such findings made by the authorities either

in the patta proceedings or in the proceedings under the

Survey and Boundaries Act are restricted and to be

understood only for the purpose of arriving a conclusion

under the provisions of the Act and the said patta

proceedings or the proceedings under the Survey and

Boundaries Act would not confer any title or be taken as a

conclusive decision, more specifically under Section 35 of

the Evidence Act.

40. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to

consider the representations / applications submitted by the

petitioners in the order of seniority and by following the

procedures as contemplated under the Governmental

orders and in consonance with the provisions of the Survey

and Boundaries Act, 1923 and pass appropriate orders on

merits and in accordance with law. Wherever the

applications are already disposed of and appeals provided

under the Act has been filed, then such appeals are to be

decided on merits and in consonance with the provisions of

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.18137 of 2023

the Survey and Boundaries Act.

3. In view of the fact that the case of the petitioner is also similar to

that of the cases (cited supra), the case of the petitioner is also to be

considered on the same line. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed

of. No costs.

21.06.2023 skr Index : Yes Speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes

To

1. The District Collector, Nagapattinam.

2. The Thasildhar, Thirukuvalai, Nagapattinam District.

3. The Surveyor, Thirukuvalai, Nagapattinam District.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.18137 of 2023

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

skr

W.P.No.18137 of 2023

21.06.2023

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis