Kirubavathi Kirubakaran Alias Grace Nadar v. The Tahsildar

O R D E R [Order of the Court was made by DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.] Mr.S.P.Maharajan, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondent.

¶2With the consent of both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself.

¶3The notice, dated 02.01.2026, issued by the respondent under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, to the petitioner to show cause as to why the alleged encroachment made by her in the subject land should not be removed, is under challenge in this writ petition.

¶4Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the District Collector, Thoothukudi District, in his order dated 09.12.2025, rejecting the request of the petitioner to rectify the mistake in the classification of the subject land, has referred about the cancellation of the assignment patta given in favour of one Muthu Veerappan vide proceedings dated 16.03.1981 However, the petitioner herein was not furnished with the said proceedings dated 16.03.1981.

¶5The short point to be considered in this writ petition is whether the subject land is "Tharisu" as per the Village Register and the assignment of the subject land in favour of one Muthu Veerappan on 27.12.1969 has been validly cancelled vide proceedings dated 16.03.1981.

¶6In any event, it is a matter to be considered and decided by the Revenue Authorities based on the records. The impugned notice is only a show cause notice to show cause as to why the encroachment made by the petitioner in the subject land should not be removed. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to submit appropriate explanation and documents to the impugned notice to sustain her claim over the subject land. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned notice, except to point out that since only a show cause notice has been issued and the petitioner has been directed to submit her explanation, she shall duly avail the remedy available under the statute before the authorities concerned in accordance with law. We make it clear that any decision taken by the authorities concerned must be based on the records and in accordance with law. The petitioner shall give explanation to the impugned notice within a period of seven days from today and thereafter, the authorities shall take appropriate decision as directed above.

¶7With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

[G.J., J.] [K.K.R.K., J.]

08.01.2026 NCC : Index : Internet :

krk To: The Tahsildar, Thoothukudi Taluk, Thoothukudi. DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,-J. AND K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,-J. krk W.P.(MD)-No.427-of-2026 and W.M.P.(MD)-No.394-of-2026

08.01.2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.01.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN and W.M.P.(MD) No.394 of 2026 Kirubavathi Kirubakaran @ Grace Nadar represented through her Power Agent S.Allwin Jebastin ... Petitioner -vs- The Tahsildar Thoothukudi Taluk Thoothukudi ... Respondent PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the respondent in Na.Ka.No.A3/11/2026, dated 02.01.2026 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.H.Arumugam For Respondent : Mr.S.P.Maharajan Special Government Pleader