S P RAJAMANI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has come forward with this Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to forbear the respondents 2 and 3 and their subordinates from interfering into petitioner's peaceful possession, demolition and enjoyment of property (residential house) in Survey No.159/1, an extent of 2 cents, situated at Vellitrippur Village, Anthiyur Taluk, Erode District or in the alternative, direct the respondents 1 to 3 to issue house site patta to the petitioner under the special scheme of the first respondent within stipulated time if it is encroached.

(2.) According to the petitioner, he hails from a poor agricultural family and possessing agricultural land in Survey No.158 of Vellithirupur Village, Reddypalayam Post, Anthiyur Taluk, Erode District and the same was acquired by him by means of registered partition deed, dated 15.07.2012 (vide document No.958 of 2002). It is the stand of the petitioner that from the date of partition of the said property, he and his family members are residing there and enjoying the property. Furthermore, he is cultivating his land for his family's livelihood and has constructed a small house in S.No.158 of the said village. However, he was informed by the Revenue Officials that 2 cents of land (residential house) is in S.No.159 of the said village, which is adjoining the petitioner's house and S.No.159 is classified as 'Vandi Pathai' (cart track). The plea of the petitioner is that he had constructed his house in his patta land and he had not made any encroachment as averred by the respondents in S.No.159. Because of the neighbouring land dispute between the petitioner and the fourth respondent, the fourth respondent had lodged a complaint as if the petitioner had encroached the cart-track and put up construction of a residential house. In fact, the claim of the fourth respondent is an incorrect one and against the rights of the petitioner to reside in his patta land. The petitioner has obtained electricity connection and also has documents to show that from the year 1993, he is residing there and that 20 feet of the cart-track is available to the use of the fourth respondent and others and the remaining area is covered by big rock on the other side, which is 5 metres. As such, the claim of the fourth respondent is an illegal one and against the petitioner's occupation of the property in question.

(3.) While that be the fact situation, on 01.03.2017, the version of the petitioner is that the third respondent/Tahsildar had passed an order to remove the encroachment made by the petitioner in S.No.159/1 of Vellitirupur Village. Pursuant to the said order of the third respondent, dated 01.03.2017, the petitioner submitted his explanation before the second respondent/District Collector and the third respondent/Tahsildar and the same was not considered by them. Hence, the petitioner filed a civil suit in O.S.No.137 of 2017 before the District Munsif Court, Bhavani, against the respondents 2 to 4 herein. The trial Court in I.A.No.498 of 2017 in O.S.No.137 of 2017 granted an order of interim injunction on 03.10.2017 and the main suit is pending as on date. Besides the above, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 16.11.2017, the third respondent and the Revenue Officials came to the petitioner's house and informed that they are going to demolish his residential house, as it is encroached by the petitioner and the residential house in S.No.159/1 of the said village was put up by him and that the demolition of the petitioner's house will be done as per the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.21888 of 2017, dated 17.08.2017, which is filed by the fourth respondent herein as writ petitioner therein. In fact, in the aforesaid Writ Petition, a demolition order was passed by this Court and a direction was issued to the third respondent to conduct enquiry after de-notice being issued to the petitioner.