Madras High Court
Lakshmikanthan vs The District Collector on 7 November, 2023
1 W.P.(MD)Nos.3739 OF 2017 etc.
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 07.11.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
W.P.(MD)Nos.3739 of 2017, 8444, 9117, 9338, 9376,
9397, 9557, 9667 to 9671, 10587, 10589 of 2018 & 6441
to 6445, 24615 of 2022
AND
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.7975, 8499, 8615 to 8619, 8632, 8654,
8655, 8694, 8695, 8794, 8795, 9655, 9657 of 2018,
15757 of 2020 & 5005, 5006 to 5009, 18693 of 2022
W.P.(MD)No.3739 of 2017
Lakshmikanthan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The District Collector,
Collectorate,
Ramanathapuram District.
2. The Sub Collector,
Paramakudi,
Ramanathapuram District.
3. The Commissioner of Land
Administration,
Chepauk Chennai.
(R-3 is impleaded vide Order dated 23.11.2017
in W.M.P.(MD)No.3524 of 2017) ... Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/8
2 W.P.(MD)Nos.3739 OF 2017 etc.
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified
Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned
order in Pa.Mu.(A4) 5060/2015 dated 23.12.2016 on the file of
the second respondent and quash the same and consequently
direct the second respondent to measure, reclassify and issue
patta to the petitioner's house property in door No.10/295B
measuring 1878 sq.mts. in T.S.No.2, 3 and 4 in Block 5, Ward
H in Paramakudi Town, Ramanathapuram District within the
stipulated period.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Senthil
For Respondents : Mr.R.Baskaran,
Additional Advocate General,
assisted by,
Mr.K.Balasubramani,
Special Government Pleader.
***
COMMON ORDER
Heard the learned counsel on either side.
2. The case of the respondents is that the petitioners had
committed encroachment in respect of Vaigai river. Form III
notices had been issued under the provisions of the Tamil
Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Act
2007.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
pointed out that the encroachment of river poramboke cannot
be dealt with under 2007 Act and he relied on the decision of
the Hon'ble Full Bench reported in 2015 (6) CTC 369
(T.K.Shanmugam V. State of Tamil Nadu). Paragraph Nos.
10 and 45 of the said judgment had held as follows:-
“ 10. The order of reference dated
05.08.2015, passed by the First Bench in W.P.No.
1294 of 2009, reads as follows:-
The public interest litigation seeks patta
rights for the persons who have encroached on
land, which is undisputedly water course land.
The claim of the petitioner is predicated on a
long period occupation.
2. The submission of the learned counsel for
the petitioner is that the judgment of the Division
Bench of this Court in L.Krishnan Vs. State of
Tamil Nadu (2005 (4) CTC 1) seeking removal of
encroachment from water bodies is general in
character, as also the observations of the
Honourable Supreme Court in different judicial
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
pronouncements. He submits that this aspect has
been examined by the Division Bench of this
Court in Sivakasi Region Tax Payers Association
Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, rep., by its Secretary to
Government & Others (CDJ 2008 MHC 2127),
where it has been observed that in pursuance to
the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court
in L.Krishnan's case (supra), the Tamil Nadu
Protection of Tanks and Eviction of
Encroachment Act, 2007, came into being. This
Act provides for checking encroachment and
eviction of encroachment in tanks which are
under the control and management of Public
Works Department. It is, thus, submitted that
such of the tanks which do not fall within the
purview of the Act cannot be subjected to
requiring protection from encroachment and
this, persons like the petitioner cannot be
evicted.
3. The question thus arises for
consideration is whether the provisions of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
said Act in effect in any manner dilutes the wider
compass of the observations made in
L.Krishnan's case (supra) or any other judgments
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, requiring
protection of water bodies.
4. We are of the view that this matter needs
to be examined by a Larger Bench of this Court.
Papers be prepared. The matter be laid before
the Full Bench on 02.09.2015.
5. We appoint Mr.Naveen Kumar Murthi as
Amicus to assist us in this matter and a complete
set be supplied by the Registry to him.
...
45. In the light of the above, we answer the
reference on the following terms:-
“ The provisions of the Tamil Nadu
Protection of Tanks and Eviction of
Encroachment Act, 2007, does not in any manner
dilute the observations/directions issued in
L.Krishnan Vs. State of TamilNadu reported
in 2005 (4) CTC 1, as quoted with the approval
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh
Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2011) 11
SCC 396, and the observations contained in
paragraph 20(d)(e) of the judgment of the
Division Bench in T.S.Senthil Kumar, Vs.
Government of Tamil Nadu, reported in
2010(3) MLJ 771 and that the tanks which do
not fall within the purview of the Tamil Nadu
Protection of Tanks and Eviction of
Encroachment Act, 2007, also require protection
from encroachment and any encroachment made
in such Tanks or Water bodies have to be
removed by following the provisions of the Tamil
Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905.”
4. Under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Protection of
Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Act, rivers are
specifically dealt with. We are therefore of the view that the
encroachment on river poramboke will have to be dealt with
under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment
Act 1905.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. In this view of the matter, Form III notices are
quashed. The competent authorities are at liberty to take
action as per law. These writ petitions stand allowed on these
terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions are closed.
(G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.) & (B.PUGALENDHI, J.)
7th November 2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
PMU
To:
1. The District Collector,
Collectorate,
Ramanathapuram District.
2. The Sub Collector,
Paramakudi,
Ramanathapuram District.
3. The Commissioner of Land
Administration,
Chepauk Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
AND
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
PMU
W.P.(MD)No.3739 of 2017 etc.
07.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
