SAMPATH Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Eviction Notice issued under Sec. 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) The learned counsel for the writ petitioner mainly contended that the authorities competent are picking and choosing the persons for the purpose of invoking the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. Thus, the actions of the respondents are discriminatory and they are allowing all such similar commercial centres in the very same locality, who all are also in occupation of the Government Poramboke lands, which is classified as "Kuttai", which is a water body. Thus, the petitioner states that they are in occupation of a very small portion of the land for the purpose of living and in the event of allowing all other encroachers in that locality, the petitioner alone cannot be evicted by invoking the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act.

(3.) Further, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in respect of grant of patta, the petitioner submitted a representation to the authorities competent on 9/3/2005 and the said representation is yet to be considered. Thus, the writ petitioner is constrained to challenge the very issuance of the notice.