WP No. 33575 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE E.MANOHARAN Writ Petition No. 33575 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos. 36955 & 36958 of 2026 1. Pulavar Sengodan @ Sengodan 2. K.Kamalakannan 3. K.Palanisamy 4. P.Saraswathi ..Petitioners Vs 1. The Collector of Namakkal District District Collectorate, Namakkal-637 003. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) District Collectorate Office, Namakkal-637 001. 3. The Tahsildar, Rasipuram Taluk Office Athur Road, Bazaar, Rasipuram- 637 408 Namakkal District. 4. The Secretary, Pattanam Town Panchayat No.8,Pallikadu Street (Pothamalai Road), Pattanam- 637 408, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District. 5. P.Mani, ..Respondents Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 33575 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 6 from the 1st Respondent pertaining to their order dated 26.07.2026 made in Na.Ka.6494/2025/L5 of the 1st respondent, dismissing our appeal dated 14.02.2025 and also ordered to remove all the encroachments in survey No.64/1 at Pattanam Village, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District and to quash the same and pass. For Petitioners: Mr.T.Dhanasekaran For Respondents: Mr.K.Surendar Special Government Pleader for R1 to R4 ORDER (Order of the Court was made by Dr.G.Jayachandran J.) The land in Survey No.64/1, Pattanam village, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District, is classified as ‘Parai’ (Rock) and is unassessed to revenue. Admittedly, it is in the possession of the writ petitioner. Earlier, Selvam and Kokila filed a writ petition in W.P.No.22623 of 2025, seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the authorities to take action against the petitioner for encroaching upon Government land. 2. The Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.06.2025, directed the respondents to consider the representation dated 04.01.2024 within a specified time frame, issuing the following directions:- “7.In light of the above discussion, this Court deems it appropriate to issue the following directions: (I) The second respondent shall proceed further in accordance with the provisions of the Tamil Nadu https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 33575 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 6 Lend Encroachment Act, 1905, by calling upon the fourth respondent and other alleged encroachers to respond to the notices issued under Section 7 of the Act within two weeks from today ie. on or before 10.07.2025; (ii) In the event that the fourth respondent and other alleged encroachers submit their replies or representations in response to the notices, the second respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, as contemplated under Section 6 of the Act; (iii) It is needless to state that all rights and contentions of the fourth respondent and other alleged encroachers shall remain preserved and may be agitated in appropriate proceedings, if so advised; (iv) It is clarified that the observations made in this order are limited solely for the purpose of adjudication of the present writ petition and shall not prejudice or affect the rights of the fourth respondent or any other person. Accordingly, notice to the fourth respondent is dispensed with; (v) The entire exercise, as directed above, shall be completed by the second respondent within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of this order, i.e., on or before 21.08.2025.” https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 33575 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 6 3. In compliance with the said directions, the respondents initiated eviction proceedings against the petitioner from the encroached land classified as ‘Parai’. Ultimately, after conducting enquiry, the District Collector passed eviction orders on 26.07.2026. Challenging the said order, the present writ petition has been filed. The petitioner contends that the land his occupation of the land does not cause any public disturbance and the eviction proceedings have been initiated at the instigation of the 5th respondent. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that for long years, the petitioner has been in possession of a portion of the land. Therefore, the action taken by the respondents at the instigation of the 5th respondent ought to be dropped and quashed. 5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents submitted that the 5th respondent is the owner of the adjacent land. He further submitted that the earlier writ petition pertained to the very same land and pursuant to the direction of this Court, the officials have acted in accordance with law by issuing eviction notice after affording opportunity to all parties concerned. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to interfere the impugned order. As the order passed by the District https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 33575 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 6 Collector is well-reasoned and justified, it is fortified. Hence, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs. (Dr.G.J.,J.) (E.M.,J.) 20-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No rpl To 1.The Collector of Namakkal District District Collectorate, Namakkal-637 003. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) District Collectorate Office, Namakkal-637 001. 3.The Tahsildar, Rasipuram Taluk Office Athur Road, Bazaar, Rasipuram- 637 408 Namakkal District. 4.The Secretary, Pattanam Town Panchayat No.8,Pallikadu Street (Pothamalai Road), Pattanam- 637 408, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 33575 of 2026 __________ Page6 of 6 DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN J. and E.MANOHARAN J. rpl Writ Petition No. 33575 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos. 36955 & 36958 of 2026 20-08-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis