Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8998 (MAD)

S.G.NAYAZ v. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

WP/49183/2025 · 2026-07-24

G Jayachandran, N Mala

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP No. 49183 of 2025 __________ Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE N. MALA WP No.49183 of 2025 S.G.Nayaz ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The District Collector Krishnagiri District. 2. The District Revenue Officer Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District. 3. The Sub Collector Hosur, Krishnagiri District- 635 109. 4. The Commissioner Hosur Municipal Corporation, Hosur, Krishnagiri District- 635 109. 5. Thiru.K.Gopinath ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : To direct the respondents No.1 to 4 to consider the representation, dated 29.07.2025, made by the petitioner herein for removal of encroachments made in the public pathway by the 5th respondent commencing from TSLR No.81, Singaravelu Mudaliar Street, Block No.55, Ward-B, Hosur Town, reaching to TSLR No.110 at Nethaji Road, Hosur Town, Krishnagiri District. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 49183 of 2025 __________ Page2 of 5 For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Ramamurthy For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Surendar, Govt. Advocate for RR1 TO 3 Mr.T.Balaji for R4 Mr.S.Mukunth, Senior Advocate, for M/S.Sarvabhauman Associates for R5 ORDER (Order of the Court was made by Dr.G.Jayachandran J.) This petition is filed seeking a mandamus to consider the representation of the petitioner to remove the encroachments made in public pathway falling under TSLR Nos.81 to 110 of Singaravelu Mudaliar Street, Block No.55, Ward- B, Hosur Town, Krishnagiri District. 2. It is alleged that the fifth respondent herein is misusing his power as a past Member of Legislative Assembly and sitting Member of Parliament. 3. The counter filed by the District Collector – first respondent indicates that Town Survey Nos.81 and 251 are currently classified as “Government Poramboke – Santhu/Street”, whereas Town Survey No.110 is a patta land of the fifth respondent. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that till the year 2006, the land in Town Survey No.110 was classified as “Gramanatham” and, all-of-a-sudden, the revenue records have been altered as if the said land is a patta land of the fifth respondent. It is further stated that earlier when action was taken by the Municipality for evicting the encroachment in Town Survey https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 49183 of 2025 __________ Page3 of 5 Nos.81 and 251, that was challenged before the High Court and, in view of the procedural lapses, the Writ Petitions were allowed. It is also submitted that the Municipality is now contemplating to issue fresh show cause notice to those encroachers for eviction. 5. Learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State, has produced ‘A’ Register extract and Adangal in respect of the property now in Town Survey No.110 and the extract indicates that only after the year 2006, the Gramanatham land, measuring 22 cents, has been shown as patta land of the fifth respondent and earlier it was shown as “Arasu Poramboke – Gramanatham” land. 6. From the facts and records, it is necessary to ascertain how patta was assigned to the fifth respondent in respect of Gramanatham land to an extent of 22 cents. Therefore, the first respondent – District Collector is hereby directed to cause notice to the fifth respondent for production of documents as to how patta was assigned to him and whether the patta claimed by him is a genuine patta assigned to him following due process. The exercise of verifying the genuineness of the patta held by the fifth respondent is to be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7. It is also brought to our notice that Town Survey Nos.81 and 251 are also Government Poramboke lands and presently in occupation of the fifth respondent, but no action has been taken by the local body for eviction, despite an abortive attempt was made earlier by the authorities. Hence, the authorities https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 49183 of 2025 __________ Page4 of 5 are directed to proceed in accordance with law for evicting the occupants in Town Survey Nos.81 and 251. 8. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. (G.J.,J.) (N.M.,J.) 24-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No DIXIT To 1. The District Collector Krishnagiri District. 2. The District Revenue Officer Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District. 3. The Sub Collector Hosur, Krishnagiri District- 635 109. 4. The Commissioner Hosur Municipal Corporation, Hosur, Krishnagiri District- 635 109. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 49183 of 2025 __________ Page5 of 5 DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J. AND N.MALA, J. DIXIT WP No.49183 of 2025 24-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis