R.Sunitha Devi v. The District Collector

ORDER The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus restraining the 3rd respondent (Tahsildar, Shoolagiri ) from conducting any survey or demarcation in the subject property pending final disposal of the enquiry before the 2nd respondent (Sub-Collector, Hosur).

¶2The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, in the present case, the 4th respondent herein had approached this Court by filing a Writ Petition in W.P. No. 13484 of 2026, seeking a survey and demarcation of the boundaries of the subject property. He contended that the 4th respondent obtained the order dated 16.04.2026 by suppressing material facts, specifically failing to disclose the pendency of proceedings before the Sub-Collector. Page2 of 5 Pursuant to the said order, the official respondents proceeded to measure the property without issuing notice to the petitioner, who was arrayed as the 5th respondent in that writ petition. He further submitted that even in the said order, this Court had categorically directed that notice must be issued to all interested parties.

¶3The learned Government Counsel appearing for the official respondents submitted that the authorities will issue due notice to the petitioner and all concerned parties before proceeding with the measurement of the property.

¶4Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Counsel appearing for the official respondents.

¶5Such being the case, this Court is of the view that the official respondents are duty-bound to issue notice to the adjacent landowners and any interested parties before conducting any survey, which was already explicitly mandated by this Court in its order dated 16.04.2026 passed in W.P. No. 13484 of 2026. Despite specific directions, the official respondents have failed to issue notice to the parties concerned. Page3 of 5

¶6In view of the above, this Court directs the official respondents to issue due notice to the petitioner as well as the 4th respondent herein, and afford them an opportunity for a personal hearing, before conducting any survey or demarcating the property, and thereafter, proceed strictly in accordance with law.

¶7With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 10-07-2026 Asi To

¶1The District cCllector Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.

¶2The Sub-Collector Hosur Divisional Office, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

¶3The Tahsildar Soolagiri Taluk Office, Soolagiri, Krishnagiri District. Page4 of 5 WPoNo.o26136oofo2026 KRISHNANoRAMASAMY,oJ. Asi WPoNo.o26136oofo2026 10-07-2026 Page5oofo5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 10-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY and W.M.P.No.28535 of 2026 R.Sunitha Devi W/o.Ranjith Kumar, Flat No.4B, South Wing, Heritage Apartments, 4th Cross Street, Ormes Road, Kilpauk, Chennai- 010. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The District Collector Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri. 2. The Sub- Collector Hosur Divisional Office, Hosur, Krishnagiri District. 3. The Tahsildar Soolagiri Taluk Office, Soolagiri, Krishnagiri District. 4. G.Sankaran S/o.Ganapathy, No.2/124, Periyar, Kottapalli Village and Post, Krishnagiria Taluk and District ..Respondent(s) Page1 of 5 PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus restraining the 3rd respondent (Tahsildar, Shoolagiri ) from conducting any survey or demarcation in the subjectproperty pending final disposal of the enquiry before the 2nd respondent (Sub- Collector, Hosur). For Petitioner(s): Mr. G.M.Ananthakumar For Respondent(s): Ms.Inthu Karunakaran Government Counsel for R1 to R3