M SUBRAMANIAM Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed for issuing a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to remove the encroachments in Survey Nos.178, 179/2, 72 and 74 in Ennamangalam eri, Bhavani Taluk, Erode District.

(2.) THE allegations made in the writ petition are to the following effect :- Ennamangalam Eri (lake) is situated in R.S.No.178 with an area of 46.76.70 Hectares. THE water from such lake is used for irrigation of ayacut lands situate in the East and West of the lake. Such lake irrigates about 31.60.5 Hectares of lands and, moreover, because of the lake, percolation of water in the wells of the adjoining area is maintained. THE allegation is to the effect that influential persons have encroached upon the water spread area on the western and northern sides of the lake. THE rain water from Burgur hills and the waste lands on the North and West of the lake is the source of water and if the water flow is obstructed on the northern and western sides by cultivation, the flow of water to the lake would be obviously affected. THE encroachers have raised the level of ground by encroaching upon the lake area, thus diminishing the water spread area. By referring to several decisions such as 2001(6) SCC 496 (Hinch Lal Tiwari V. Kamala Devi And Others), 2005(4) Ctc 1 (L. Krishnan V. State Of Tamil Nadu And Others), the petitioner has prayed for effective steps to be taken to remove the illegal encroachers. It is further stated that representation to that effect has been made before the second respondent on 18.12.2006 by the villagers numbering about 120, but except issuing some notices under Section 7 of the Land Encroachment Act, no effective steps have been taken.

(3.) THERE is no doubt that it is the duty of the State Government to protect the properties belonging to the State and more particularly to ensure that there is no unauthorised encroachment in natural water-bodies. At the same time, merely because there is an allegation of encroachment, without hearing the alleged encroachers, the High Court should not pass a specific order to remove any particular encroachment as, such an order would be violative of the principles of natural justice. In the present case, the alleged encroachers have not been impleaded. In such a scenario, it would not be appropriate on our part to pass a specific order of removal of any particular encroacher.