Madras High Court
A.R.Ramasamy vs The District Collector on 20 March, 2023
W.P.(MD)No.5949 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 20.03.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
W.P.(MD)No.5949 of 2023
and
W.M.P(MD)No.5533 of 2023
A.R.Ramasamy : Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
O/o District Collectorate,
Sivagangai.
2.The Thasildhar,
Karaikudi Taluk,
Sivagangai District.
3.The Zonal Deputy Thasildar,
Karaikudi Taluk,
Sivagangai District.
: Respondents
PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5949 of 2023
to the impugned eviction notice dated 03.03.2023 on the file of the
respondent No.3 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathy Roy
Senior Counsel for
M/s Lajapthy Roy and Associates
For Respondent : Mr.V.Nirmalkumar
Govt. Advocate
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J)
Challenge is to the show cause notice issued under Section 7 of the
Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 dated 03.03.2023. In and by the
said notice, the third respondent/Zonal Deputy Thasildar, Karaikudi had
required the petitioner to show cause why the encroachments made by him
in S.Nos.151 and 152 of Amaravathi Pudhur Village should not be
removed, since the said land has been classified as channel.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5949 of 2023
2.Mr.T.Lajapathy Roy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
petitioner would submit that the petitioner has launched a civil suit in
O.S.No.70 of 2016 seeking a decree for declaration of title to the property
and for consequential injunction restraining the defendant from causing any
disturbance to his peaceful possession and enjoyment against the District
Collector, Sivagangai and other revenue officials. The suit property in the
said suit is comprised in S.Nos.149, 150, 151 and 152, measuring an extent
of 5 Acres 55 Cents, in Amaravathi Pudhur Village. Though the said suit
was initially dismissed and the dismissal was confirmed in appeal, as
against the said Judgment and Decree of the Appellate Court, second appeal
in SA(MD)No.481 of 2020 is pending. In CMP(MD)No.5486 of 2020, this
Court had directed the parties to maintain status quo. Therefore, according
to the learned Senior Counsel, the Government being a party to the civil
litigation has to await the result of the civil litigation and it cannot launch
the proceedings under the Land Encroachment Act against the status quo
order that has been granted by this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5949 of 2023
3.Mr.V.Nirmalkumar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the
respondents would however, submit that one Rakkappan, who is a third
party, had filed a writ petition seeking a Mandamus directing removal of
encroachments made by the petitioner. The petitioner was arrayed as 4th
respondent in the said writ petition in W.P(MD)No.12892 of 2018 and a
Division Bench of this Court had directed the authorities to take appropriate
proceedings for eviction.
4.We find this practice prevailing particularly in this part of the State
where the civil Courts' decrees and orders are suppressed and orders are
obtained under the writ jurisdiction. This is a undesiarable trend.
Invariably, the pendency or otherwise of the civil litigation and the orders
passed therein are not disclosed in the writ proceedings. Often persons,
who are parties to the civil litigation, invoke the writ jurisdiction
suppressing the civil litigation. This cannot continue forever. If we come
across such cases in future, we will be constrained to impose heavy costs.
There is an order of status quo granted by the learned single Judge on the
civil side and there is a direction to remove the encroachment on the writ
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5949 of 2023
side. It is a very unfortunate situation. However, in view of the fact that the
Government is a party to the civil litigation and the status quo order has
been granted by this Court in the second appeal, the said order will acquire
the precedence over the direction issued by the Division Bench for removal
of the encroachment. Hence, the impugned notice is set aside. It will open
to the Government to proceed further in accordance with the decision of the
Civil Court.
5.This writ petition is allowed accordingly. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[R.S.M., J.] & [L.V.G., J.]
20.03.2023
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
skn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5949 of 2023
To
1.The District Collector,
O/o District Collectorate,
Sivagangai.
2.The Thasildhar,
Karaikudi Taluk,
Sivagangai District.
3.The Zonal Deputy Thasildar,
Karaikudi Taluk,
Sivagangai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.5949 of 2023
R.SUBRAMANIAN., J
AND
L.VICTORIA GOWRI.,J
skn
W.P.(MD)No.5949 of 2023
and
W.M.P(MD)No.5533 of 2023
20.03.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
