RAVICHANDRAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. P. Samual Gunasingh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. D. Muruganantham, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition, challenging the notice issued by the second respondent dated 20.11.2017, calling upon the petitioner to appear before him on 25.11.2017 at 11.00 a.m., and produce the documents in support of his claim over the land in question, as there is an allegation that the petitioner has encroached into the lands which are classified as water bodies/Gramam natham.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned notice suffers from lack of jurisdiction, as in terms of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1984, the concerned Block Development Officer only has to initiate action and the Tahsildar can look into the matter, only after the report submitted by the Block Development Officer of the concerned area. In support of his contention, the learned counsel placed reliance on the decision in the case of G. Radhakrishnan v. The President, Edayakottai Panchayat, Edayakottai, Oddanchathiram Taluk, Dindigul District reported in 2008 (3) L.W. 548 .