WP No. 264 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY WP No. 264 of 2026 K.B.Vasudevan S/o.D.Balakrishnan, Door No.6/20 Kannivadi, Kannivadi Village, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Commissioner of Land Reforms Commissionaire of Land Reforms, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-5 2. The Director-cum-Special Officer Tamilnadu Boodhan Board, Chennai-600 005 3. The Special Secretary Commissioner of Land Reforms, Tamilnadu Boodhan Board, Chennai-600 005 4. The District Collector District Collectorate, Tiruppur 5. The District Revenue Officer District Collectorate, Tiruppur 6. The Revenue Divisional Officer Revenue Divisional Office, Dharapuram 7. The Thasildar Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District __________ Page1 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 264 of 2026 8. The Village Administrative Officer Erachapadi, Kannivadi Village, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District 9. Thirumalaisamy S/o.Late.Ramaraya Gounder @ Rayappa Gounder, Erichapadi, Kannivadi Village, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the 1st and 2nd respondents from converting the agricultural land to residential plots in S.No.415/2 in Kannivadi village, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District which was gifted by the petitioners Great grandfather namely Krishnasamy Gounder for the purpose of Agriculture by considering the petitioner’s representation dated 08.09.2025. For Petitioner(s): Ms.C.B.Geeth Sanchitha for Mr.C.Ramaraj For Respondent(s): Ms.Inthu Karunakaran Government Counsel for R1 to R8 For R9 – Notice Served – No appearance __________ Page2 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 264 of 2026 ORDER The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition seeking to forbear the official respondents from converting the agricultural land comprised in S.No.415/2, Kannivadi Village, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District, into house sites for distribution to the landless poor, contending that the land was originally donated by his ancestors solely for agricultural purposes and that such conversion would defeat the object of the donation. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the agricultural land in S.No.415/2 in Kannivadi Village, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District was gifted in favour of the father of the 9th respondent. After demise of the 9th respondent’s father, the official respondents are now proposing to acquire the subject property for formation of house sites for distribution to the landless poor, which is contrary to the intention of the donor. Hence, the petitioner seeks appropriate directions from this Court. 3. Per contra, the learned Government Counsel appearing for the official respondents submitted that the proposal is only at the preliminary stage and no notification for acquisition has been issued till date. It is further submitted that __________ Page3 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 264 of 2026 the petitioner has no subsisting legal right or locus standi to maintain the present Writ Petition, as the property stands in the name and possession of the 9th respondent. It is also contended that the petition is premature and liable to be dismissed. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record. 5. It is not in dispute that the subject property had been donated long ago in favour of the predecessor-in-interest of the 9th respondent and the property is presently in the possession and enjoyment of the 9th respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is founded solely on the alleged intention of the donor that the land should continue to be used only for agricultural purposes. Admittedly, as on date, no acquisition proceedings have been initiated by issuance of any statutory notification. The proposal, if any, is only at the administrative stage. The apprehension expressed by the petitioner is therefore premature. This Court cannot issue a writ on the basis of a mere apprehension, in the absence of any concluded decision or statutory action affecting the rights of the parties. __________ Page4 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 264 of 2026 6. Moreover, if and when any acquisition proceedings are initiated in accordance with law, it is always open to the persons aggrieved, including the affected landowner or any person having a legally enforceable right, to work out their remedies in the manner known to law. At this stage, no cause of action has arisen warranting interference of this Court. It is also made clear that while considering any proposal for acquisition, the competent authorities shall take into account the availability of Government poramboke lands, tharisu lands or other suitable lands in the locality before resorting to acquisition of productive agricultural lands, in accordance with the applicable statutory provisions. 7. In view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the Writ Petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed. 13-07-2026 Asi __________ Page5 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 264 of 2026 To 1. The Commissioner Of Land Reforms Commissionaire Of Land Reforms, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-5 2. The Director Cum Special Officer Tamilnadu Boodhan Board, Chennai-600 005 3. The Special Secretary Commissioner Of Land Reforms, Tamilnadu Boodhan Board, Chennai-600 005 4. The District Collector District Collectorate, Tiruppur 5. The District Revenue Officer District Collectorate, Tiruppur 6. The Revenue Divisional Officer Revenue Divisional Office, Dharapuram 7. The Thasildar Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District 8. The Village Administrative Officer Erachapadi, Kannivadi Village, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District. __________ Page6 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 264 of 2026 KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. Asi WP No. 264 of 2026 13-07-2026 __________ Page7 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis