V.Rajkumar vs The District Collector/Distr
- Court
- Madras High Court
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5887 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 29-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5887 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011473812026}
AND
WMP CRL.(MD) No. 1301 of 2026
V.Rajkumar ..Petitioner
Vs
1. The District Collector/District Monetary Committee,
Madurai District.
2. The Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate/
Revenue Divisional Officer,
Thirumangalam,
Madurai District.
3. The Tahsildar,
Thiruparankundram,
Madurai District.
4. The Inspector of Police,
Perungudi Police Station,
Madurai District.
5. C.Nagarajan
6. Selvaraj
7. Mathukumar ..Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ or order or direction or in the nature of Writ of
Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction in the nature
__________
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 06:32:18 pm )
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5887 of 2026
of Writ, calling for the records relating to the impugned order in
Moo.Mu.No.4473/2023/A2 dated 06.07.2024 under section 145 of Cr.P.C
nd
on the file of the 2 respondent and quash the same as illegal and pass
such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vellaichamy
For Respondents : Mr.A.Sivasubramanian
Additional Government Pleader
for R1 to R3
Mr.D.Rajaboopathy
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
for R4
ORDER
The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the
nd nd
proceedings of the 2 respondent dated 06.07.2024, whereby the 2
respondent/Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate/Revenue Divisional
Officer, invoking Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,
rd
directed the 3 respondent to remove the temporary structure stated to
have been erected in the disputed property.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner is carrying on a carpentry business in Survey No. 49/7 in
Valaiyankulam village, Madurai South Taluk, Madurai District. He
would submit that the land adjoining the petitioner's property is a private
__________
Page 2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 06:32:18 pm )
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5887 of 2026
patta land and that the petitioner has extended his carpentry unit into the
adjoining land with the permission of the private land owners.
th
3. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that the 5
respondent, a retired Sub Collector residing in Sivagangai District, laid
claim to the existence of a common pathway in Survey No. 50/4B1A of
the said village. The said claim was disputed by the petitioner and the
th
other land owners. The 5 respondent, by virtue of his former official
position, influenced the official respondents to initiate proceedings
against the petitioner, alleging that he had illegally laid a pathway.
th
4. In the above circumstances, the 4 respondent/The Inspector of
Police, Perungudi Police Station registered a formal FIR in Crime No. 94
nd
of 2023 and based on which the 2 respondent initiated proceedings
nd
under Section 145 Cr.P.C. The 2 respondent thereafter passed the
rd
impugned order dated 06.07.2024, directing the 3 respondent to remove
the temporary structure allegedly put up in an extent of six cents of land.
rd
5. The learned counsel would further submit that the 3
respondent/The Tahsildar, Thiruparankundram, upon inspecting the
property, found that the disputed land was not a pathway and that a joint
__________
Page 3 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 06:32:18 pm )
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5887 of 2026
patta had been issued in respect of the property in favour of 11 persons.
rd nd
The 3 respondent accordingly submitted a report to the 2 respondent
stating that no encroachment had been made in Survey No. 50/4B1A as
alleged in the impugned order and, consequently, dropped further
proceedings.
th
6. In the meantime, the 5 respondent filed W.P(MD) No. 16578 of
rd
2025 before the Hon'ble Division Bench, seeking a direction to the 3
respondent to implement the impugned order dated 06.07.2024. The
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the private nature of the
disputed property and the report of the revenue authorities were brought
to the notice of the Hon'ble Division Bench. The authorities were directed
to submit a report, and a report was subsequently submitted on behalf of
the official respondents.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that, while
disposing of the said writ petition on 01.10.2026, the Hon'ble Division
Bench proceeded on the footing that the impugned order dated
06.07.2024 had not been challenged and, therefore, continued to remain
operative. According to the learned counsel, the subsequent direction
failed to give due consideration to the report indicating that the disputed
__________
Page 4 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 06:32:18 pm )
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5887 of 2026
land was a private patta land and that no encroachment upon Government
land had been established.
8. He would further submit that the order copy in W.P(MD) No.
16578 of 2025 was not available to him when the present Writ Petition
was instituted and that, in view of the observations made by the Hon'ble
Division Bench, he has approached this Court challenging the original
proceedings dated 06.07.2024.
9. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader
would submit that the official respondents are bound to take necessary
action in pursuant to the order of the Hon'ble Division Bench in
W.P(MD) No. 16578 of 2025. Further, he would submit that Section 145
Cr.P.C., as applicable to the proceedings initiated in 2023, empowers an
Executive Magistrate to intervene in a dispute concerning land, water or
boundaries likely to cause a breach of the peace. Hence prayed for
dismissal of the Writ Petition.
10. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the
learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1
to 3 and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for
__________
Page 5 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 06:32:18 pm )
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5887 of 2026
th
the 4 respondent. Perused the materials available on record.
th
11. In the present case, the petitioner disputes the 5 respondent's
claim that a common pathway exists in Survey No. 50/4B1A. This Court
th
is conscious that the 5 respondent had earlier approached the Hon'ble
Division Bench in W.P(MD) No. 16578 of 2025, seeking implementation
of the order dated 06.07.2024, and that the said Writ Petition was
disposed of on 01.10.2026. The petitioner contends that the report of the
revenue authorities and the private character of the disputed land were not
duly considered. In this regard, it is necessary to distinguish between a
challenge to the original order dated 06.07.2024 and a challenge to the
subsequent order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench. This Court
cannot sit in appeal over, review or modify the decision of the Hon'ble
Division Bench in the earlier Writ Petition. Since the Hon'ble Division
Bench expressly directed implementation of the very order now under
challenge, this Court cannot pass an order that effectively nullifies the
direction of the Hon'ble Division Bench. Therefore, if the petitioner is
aggrieved by the findings or directions contained in that decision, the
appropriate remedy must be pursued before the competent forum in
accordance with law.
__________
Page 6 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 06:32:18 pm )
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5887 of 2026
12. The petitioner may have to seek review or other appropriate
relief before the competent Bench. In view of the above, liberty is granted
to the writ petitioner to approach the competent Bench for appropriate
remedy.
13. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
29-10-2026
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
mar/skn
To
1. The District Collector/District Monetary Committee,
Madurai District.
2. The Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate/
Revenue Divisional Officer,
Thirumangalam,
Madurai District.
3. The Tahsildar,
Thiruparankundram,
Madurai District.
4. The Inspector of Police,
Perungudi Police Station,
Madurai District.
5. The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
__________
Page 7 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 06:32:18 pm )
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5887 of 2026
K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI J.
mar/skn
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5887 of 2026
AND
WMP CRL.(MD) No. 1301 of 2026
29-10-2026
__________
Page 8 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 06:32:18 pm )