Madras High Court
K.Venkatesan vs The Chief Engineer on 17 June, 2025
Author: M.Sundar
Bench: M.Sundar
W.P.No.8380 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
W.P.No.8380 of 2022
K.Venkatesan ... Petitioner
vs.
1. The Chief Engineer
PWD-WRO
State Ground & Surface Water Resource Centre
Taramani
Chennai – 600 113
2. The Joint Chief Engineer
Ground & Surface Water Resource Centre
Taramani
Chennai – 600 113
3. The District Collector
Vellore District
Office of District Collector
Sathuvachary, Vellore-9
4. The Executive Engineer
PWD-WRO
Ground & Surface Water Resource Centre
Mel Paalaru Water Land Division
Vellore District, Vellore-6
Page Nos.1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:27:05 pm )
W.P.No.8380 of 2022
5. The District Revenue Officer
Gudiyatham
6. The Tahsildar
K.V.Kuppam Taluk
Office of K.V.Kuppam Taluk
K.V.Kuppam ... Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
seeking a writ of mandamus directing Respondents 1 and 2 to remove the
encroachments on the water sources of lands and to arrange the way for
water flowing of the excess water exit from the Thondanthulasi Grama
Chetteri Lake and recommend to give compensations for the affected
formers as per the petitioner's representation dated 01.03.2022.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Anbalagan
For Respondents : Mr.T.K.Saravanan
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by M. SUNDAR, J.]
Subject matter of captioned main 'Writ Petition' ['WP' for the sake of
brevity] is alleged encroachment in the 'Water channels of Thondanthulasi
Village Chetty Eri (lake) in K.V.Kuppam Taluk, Vellore District' {'said water
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:27:05 pm )
channels' for the sake of convenience and brevity}. For the sake of abundant
clarity, it is to be stated that the surplus water flowing from Thondanthulasi
Village Chetty Eri passes through said water channels and said water
channels have been encroached.
2. Request for removal of afore-referred alleged encroachment has
not yielded results and that has necessitated captioned main WP is the
submission of learned counsel for writ petitioner.
3. Issue notice to respondents. Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Additional
Government Pleader accepts notice for respondents. Learned State counsel
submits that survey is in the anvil and depending on the survey outcome,
action for removal of encroachment (if found) will be initiated vide 'the
Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Act, 2007
(Tamil Nadu Act 8 of 2007)' (hereinafter 'Tanks Act' for the sake of brevity).
4.Though obvious, this Court deems it appropriate to make it clear
that due process of law vide Tanks Act necessarily means adherence to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:27:05 pm )
procedure put in place by a Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court vide
T.K.Shanmugam case [T.K.Shanmugam Vs. State of Tamil Nadu] reported
in 2015 (5) LW 397. As regards T.K. Shanmugam principle, relevant
paragraphs are sub sub-paragraphs (i) to (iii) of subparagraph (f) of
paragraph 15 and the same reads as follows:
'15.Certain provisions of Tank Act namely, Sections 4 to 10
were challenged in a Writ Petition with a prayer to declare those
provisions as null and void and contrary to Article 14 of the
Constitution of India on the ground that those provisions confer
upon the executive, unguided and uncanalised discretionary power,
since they denied to the persons aggrieved an opportunity of being
heard. The said Writ petition was heard by a Division Bench to
which one of us (M.Sathyanarayanan,J.) was a party. The Division
Bench took note of the various decisions including the decision in
the case of Sivakasi Region Tax Payers Association (supra),
disposed of the Writ Petitions without declaring the provisions of
the Act as unconstitutional, since no opportunity is given and held
that there is nothing in the Act which excludes the principles of
natural justice, the Act (Tank Act) does not specifically indicate
that the encroachers do not have right to be heard and issued the
following directions vide judgment dated 10.02.2010, reported in
2010 3 MLJ 771.
(a) .....
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:27:05 pm )
(b) .....
(c) .....
(d) ......
(e) .....
(f) We uphold the Act, while we provide for observance of
principles of natural justice within the Act itself, as under.
(i) When the officer of the Public Works Department
publishes the notice in Form-II in the notice boards of the
offices of Village Administrative Officer, Village Panchayat
Office and the Water Resources Organization, notice shall
also be issued to the alleged encroacher to the effect that
the survey indicates that the place in his/her occupation is
an encroachment and secondly, the notice in Form-III of
the Rules may be issued.
(ii) On receipt of the said notice, the encroacher
may give his/her objections relating to the classification of
the land in his/her occupation and the nature of the
encroachment within a period of two weeks.
(iii) Thereafter, the authorities shall consider the
objections and pass appropriate orders, in accordance
with the provisions of the Act, giving time to the
encroachers to remove the encroachment.'
To be noted, T.K.Shanmugam reiterates T.S.Senthil Kumar principle
[T.S.Senthil Kumar Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu reported in (2010) 3
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:27:05 pm )
MLJ 771] rendered by Hon'ble Coordinate coequal Division Bench.
5. The above means that the alleged encroacher/s will be put on
notice/show caused, given an opportunity and action will be subject to and
depending on cause shown / response of noticee/s. Therefore, captioned
main WP is taken up with the consent of learned counsel for writ petitioner
and learned State counsel. Though obvious, it is made clear that this order
does not touch upon the rights of noticee/s under the Tanks Act. This means
that all the rights and contentions of noticee/s stand preserved for
responding suitably when show caused / visited with notices. Though
obvious, for the sake of specificity, it is clarified that this Court, in instant
order, has not expressed any view or opinion one way or the other regarding
alleged encroachment qua said water body.
6.In the light of the narrative thus far, captioned main WP is disposed
of in the aforesaid manner, recording the stated position of learned State
counsel that survey will be done within a period of six weeks from today,
i.e., on or before 29.07.2025 and action if any, under the Tanks Act will be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:27:05 pm )
commenced as expeditiously as the business of official respondents would
permit but in any event within a period of six weeks therefrom i.e., on or
before 09.09.2025. There shall be no order as to costs.
(M.S.,J.) (H.C.,J.)
17.06.2025
Index : Yes / No
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
Speaking / Non-speaking
gpa
To
1. The Chief Engineer
PWD-WRO
State Ground & Surface Water Resource Centre
Taramani
Chennai – 600 113
2. The Joint Chief Engineer
Ground & Surface Water Resource Centre
Taramani
Chennai – 600 113
3. The District Collector
Vellore District
Office of District Collector
Sathuvachary, Vellore-9
4. The Executive Engineer
PWD-WRO
Ground & Surface Water Resource Centre
Mel Paalaru Water Land Division
Vellore District, Vellore-6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:27:05 pm )
5. The District Revenue Officer
Gudiyatham
6. The Tahsildar
K.V.Kuppam Taluk
Office of K.V.Kuppam Taluk
K.V.Kuppam
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:27:05 pm )
M.SUNDAR, J.,
and
HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J.,
gpa
17.06.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 04:27:05 pm )
