✦ High Court of India · 10 Jul 2025

Madrasdated High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 10 Jul 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
10 Jul 2025
Length
1,314 words

W.P.No.25490 of 20254. The Tahsildar Udumalpet Taluk Office Udumalpet5. The Sub-Inspector of Surveyor Udumalpet Taluk Office Udumalpet6. K.Soundarajan... RespondentsWrit Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the proceedings of the 5th respondent dated 23.06.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to conduct an enquiry and provide a fair opportunity to petitioners.For petitioners : Mr. N.UmapathiFor Respondents:Mr. T.K.SaravananAdditional Government Pleaderfor R1 to R5ORDER[Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.]Captioned main 'Writ Petition' ['WP' for the sake of brevity] has been filed with a prayer seeking issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus.Page Nos.2/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 20252. In and vide the certiorari limb of the prayer, a simple, innocuous and terse notice of inspection issued by Sub-Taluk Surveyor (cs; tl;l msth;) described as 'Sub-Inspector of Surveyor' (R5) has been assailed.3. As regards the mandamus limb, it is a consequential prayer i.e., a prayer seeking to mandamus R1 to R4 (official respondents) to inter alia conducting an enquiry.4. The genesis of the matter is an earlier writ petition being W.P.No.8997 of 2025 filed by one K.Soundarajan with a prayer to retrieve certain lands and use the same for welfare of the people, contending that 'lands admeasuring 4 acres or thereabouts in S.No.355 in Gudimangalam Village, Udumalpet Taluk, Udumalpet, Tiruppur District' [hereinafter 'said land' for the sake of convenience] were given by one Thiru.Subba Naicken, (writ petitioner's predecessor in the family) for the welfare of the people but the same has fallen in encroachment. This writ petition came to be disposed of by another Division Bench, to which one of us (M.SUNDAR.J.,) was a party in and vide order dated 18.03.2025 and a scanned copy of this order is as follows:Page Nos.3/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 2025Page Nos.4/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 2025Page Nos.5/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 2025Page Nos.6/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 2025Page Nos.7/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 2025Page Nos.8/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 2025Page Nos.9/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 20255. As regards the impugned notice, which we have described as innocuous, simple and terse, the Sub-Taluk Surveyor has fixed 09.07.2025 as the date for survey of said lands. Learned counsel submits that the same has been rescheduled to 11.07.2025 (tomorrow). This submission is recorded.6. Notwithstanding myriad grounds in the writ affidavit and multiple points set out in the writ affidavit, learned counsel for writ petitioners predicated his campaign against the impugned notice on one point and that one point is that an enquiry should be conducted before survey and this submission was made by resorting to Sections 9 and 10 of the Tamil Nadu Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 (Tamil Nadu Act No.VIII of 1923) [hereinafter 'said Act' for the sake of brevity and convenience] to deal with power of Survey Officer to determine and record undisputed as well as disputed boundaries. Sections 9 and 10 of said Act read as follows:9. Power of survey officer to determine and record an undisputed boundary.-(1) The survey officer shall have power to determine and record as undisputed any boundary in respect of which no dispute is brought to his notice. (2) Notice to registered holders of lands affected._ Notice of Page Nos.10/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 2025every decision of the survey officer under section 9(1) shall be given in the prescribed manner to the registered holders of the lands the boundaries of which may be affected the decision. 10. Power of Survey officer to determine and record a disputed boundary.-(1) Where a boundary is disputed, the survey officer, after making such inquiry as he considers necessary, shall determine the boundary and record it in accordance with his decision. The survey officer shall record in writing the reasons for his decision. (2) Notice to parties to the dispute and to registered holders of land affected.-Notice of every decision of the survey officer under section 10(1) shall be given in the prescribed manner to the parties to the dispute and other registered holders of the lands the boundaries of which may be affected by the decision.'7. A careful perusal of the language in which Sections 9 and 10 of said Act are couched makes it clear that it does not come to the aid of the writ petitioners in his campaign against the impugned notice as the two provisions deal with power of Survey Officer to determine undisputed as well as disputed boundaries and in the case on hand, the issue is not disputed boundaries. In any event, as regards the writ petitioners' contention that an opportunity should be afforded to the writ petitioner, the earlier judicial order makes it clear that R15 thereat (The District Revenue Page Nos.11/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 2025Officer, Tiruppur District) {R2 in captioned WP} shall afford an opportunity.8. Though we find no force or substance on the sole point on which the impugned notice is being assailed, as a matter of abundant caution, with the intention of ascertaining what R5-Sub-Taluk Officer intends to do on Friday (11.07.2025), we issued notice to official respondents (R1 to R5).9. Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Additional Government Pleader accepts notice for R1 and submits on instructions that the Sub-Taluk Surveyor would only survey said lands in the presence of noticees qua impugned notice and send a report to his superior so that it is placed before R2 (R15 in the previous writ petition), who will afford an opportunity before passing orders as per our earlier order dated 18.03.2025.10. The narrative thus far makes it clear that captioned WP is bereft of merits much less did it merit being moved as a Lunch Motion.11. We reiterate the earlier order dated 18.03.2025 made in W.P.No.8997 of 2025. We also deem it appropriate to record that we notice that the Revenue Authorities have acted with promptitude qua our earlier order dated 18.03.2025 and the captioned WP in our view is an attempt to Page Nos.12/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 2025derail the survey. This merits imposition of costs.12. To be noted, of the six writ petitioners, at least four of them, namely Mr.C.Nagarathinam, Mr.M.Vengidapathi, Mr.G.Eswarasamy and Mr.D.Gunasekaran have been arrayed as private respondents in the earlier writ petition i.e., R6, R13, R9 and R12 respectively and in the earlier order, all their rights have been preserved and this is another reason for us to write that the captioned WP is clearly unwarranted.13. We are informed by learned State counsel that R6 herein, who is the writ petitioner in earlier WP, has also been put on notice qua impugned notice. Therefore, we dispense with notice to R6 and take up the main WP with the consent of learned counsel for writ petitioners and learned State counsel. Though obvious, we make it clear that all the rights and contentions of R6 will stand preserved for proceedings which would continue as per our earlier order dated 18.03.2025 untrammeled by this order.Page Nos.13/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 2025In the light of the narrative thus far, captioned WP and WMP are dismissed being utterly bereft of merits. Nonetheless owing to fervent plea of learned counsel for writ petitioners we refrain from imposing costs. [M.S., J.] [H.C., J.]10.07.2025 (1/3)Index : Yes / NoNeutral Citation : Yes / NoSpeaking order / Non-speaking ordergpaPage Nos.14/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 2025To1.. The District Collector Collectorate Building Tiruppur2. The District Revenue Officer Collectorate Building Tiruppur3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Revenue Divisional Office Udumalpet Taluk Tiruppur District4. The Tahsildar Udumalpet Taluk Office Udumalpet5. The Sub-Inspector of Surveyor Udumalpet Taluk Office UdumalpetPage Nos.15/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.25490 of 2025M.SUNDAR, J.andHEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J.gpaW.P.No.25490 of 202510.07.2025(1/3)Page Nos.16/16

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments