VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

M.G.Sathish Babu v. The District Collector

DISPOSED OF
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
2 June 2026
Bench
N. Sathish Kumar, M.Jothiramanauthor
Case no.
WP(MD) 28497/2025

Follow Madras High CourtFollow N. Sathish KumarFollow M.Jothiraman

Judgment

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to respondents 1 to 4 to take immediate and effective action to remove the encroachment (tin-sheet shed and allied obstructions) put up by the 5th respondent on the 20 feet paver-block public road starting from Thirumohur Kaalikappan Main Road leading to the petitioner's property situated at Survey Nos. 72/4A and 72/5 and to restore the road to its original width and condition within such time as this Court stipulated.

¶2It is the case of the petitioner that he is in absolute possession and enjoyment of the subject property and there exists a 20 feet paver-block public road starting from Thirumohur-Kaalikappan Main road, leading to the petitioner's property. The third respondent also affirmed the existence of the said 20 feet public road as a common approach road to the lands in the area. However, the 5th respondent has erected a tin-sheet shed and thereby preventing free movement of vehicles. In this regard, the petitioner has also sent representations dated

25.08.2025 and 29.09.2025 to the respondents to remove the encroachment and restore the public road. However, the same were not considered by the respondents till date. Hence, the petitioner has filed this present writ petition.

¶3The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State would submit that the authorities concerned would conduct a survey of the land in question in the presence of all the parties concerned. He further submitted that appropriate action would be taken to remove the encroachment, if any.

¶4In such view of the matter, the second respondent is directed to conduct a survey in the place in question, after issuing notice to the petitioner, 5th respondent and all other parties concerned within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the survey reveals any encroachment, the 2nd respondent shall take necessary action for the removal of such encroachment, after affording sufficient opportunity of personal hearing to all the parties concerned and by following due process of law, within a period of three months thereafter.

¶5With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. [N.S.K., J.] & [M.J.R., J.]

02.06.2026

Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes vsm To

¶1The District Collector, Madurai District at Madurai.

¶2The Tahsildar, Madurai East Taluk, Madurai District.

¶3The Block Development Officer, Madurai East Panchayat Union, Madurai District.

¶4The Inspector of Police, Karuppayurani Police Station, Madurai District. N.SATHISH KUMAR

, J.

AND

M.JOTHIRAMAN, J. vsm W.P.(MD)No.28497 of 2025

02.06.2026

Case details

Parties and counsel

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.06.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN W.P.(MD)No.28497 of 2025 M.G.Sathish Babu ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The District Collector, Madurai District at Madurai. 2. The Tahsildar, Madurai East Taluk, Madurai District. 3. The Block Development Officer, Madurai East Panchayat Union, Madurai District. 4. The Inspector of Police, Karuppayurani Police Station, Madurai District. 5. Pandi ...Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to take immediate and effective action to remove the encroachment (tin- sheet shed and allied obstructions) put up by the 5th respondent on the 20 feet paver- block public road starting from Thirumohur Kaalikappan Main Road leading to the petitioner's property situated at Survey Nos. 72/4A and 72/5 and to restore the road to its original width and condition within such time as this Court stipulated. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Sathish Babu For Respondents : Mr.B.Saravanan, Senior Counsel for Mr.M.P.Senthil, Counsel for State for R1 to R3 Mr.I.Murugesan, Govt. Advocate for R4

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.