K.C.MOORTHY vs The State Rep. by the Additional Chief Secretary t

WP No. 20612 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.RAJESH VIVEKANANTHAN
WP No. 20612 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA011156122026}
AND
WMP Nos. 22166, 22170 and 36565 OF 2026
K.C.Moorthy
S/o.Late Chellakutti, Karaikattupudur,
Sivanmalai Village, Kangayam Taluk, Tiruppur
District.
..Petitioner
Vs
1. The State Rep. by the Additional Chief
Secretary to Government,
Revenue and Disaster management
Department, secretariat, Chennai –
600009.
2. The District Collector
Collectorate, Palladam Road,
Tiruppur - 641604.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer
Dharapuram, Tiruppur District.
4. The Revenue Tahsildar
Kangayam taluk, Tiruppur District.
__________
Page1 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:32:54 pm )

WP No. 20612 of 2026
5. K.Balasubramanian
S/o.karuppasamy gounder, 17/82,
ponmuthu nagar 3rd street, Nallur -
641604, Tiruppur District.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for
a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the
impugned orders dated (i) dated 23.02.2026 (received on 23.05.2026)
made in GO (Ms.) No.248 passed by the 1st respondent, confirming the
(ii) impugned order dated 21.09.2025 made in Na.Ka.18236/2023/Aa3
passed by the 2nd respondent, confirming the (iii) impugned order dated
22.05.2025 made in Ni.Mu.538/2025/E passed by the 3rd respondent,
confirming the (iv) impugned order dated 24.05.2024 made in
Na.Ka.No.720/2023/A9 passed by the 4th respondent, quash the same
and consequently forbear the respondents from interfering with the
petitioners patta land measuring 36 cents in RS No.455/4, sivanmalai
village, kangayam taluk, tiruppur district, pending disposal of the suit in
O.S.No.110 of 2025 on the file of the learned sub-court, Kangeyam.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Manoharan
For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Surender
Special Government Pleader – for R1 to R4
Mr.W.Clement Jonathanivan for R5
__________
Page2 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:32:54 pm )

WP No. 20612 of 2026
Order
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

The present writ petition has been instituted challenging the order
passed by the Revenue Tahsildar, Kangayam Taluk in proceedings
dated 24.05.2024 confirmed by the District Collector vide order dated
21.09.2025 and the Government Order issued in G.O.Ms.No.249,
Revenue and Disaster Management Department dated 23.02.2026,
confirming the decision of the Revenue Tahsildar and the District
Collector.
2. The issue raised in the writ petition rests on the public right to
pathway in Patta land in the context of the Revenue Standing Order
(RSO) No.26 Clause 15. The writ petitioner claims that the subject land
is a Patta land and he is the Pattadhar. The 5th respondent erroneously
claims that it is "Nilaviyal Paathai" as per the plan marked detail and
therefore the said land vests with the Government and is to be treated as
public pathway. The Revenue Tahsildar conducted an enquiry and
formed an opinion that the subject property is classified as 'Nilaviyal
Paathai' as per the plan marked detail and therefore it is to be treated as
__________
Page3 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:32:54 pm )

WP No. 20612 of 2026
public pathway and initiated action for removal of obstructions /
encroachments.
3. The District Collector conducted an enquiry independently and
confirmed the decision of the Tahsildar. The revision filed before the
Government was also decided on merits. A perusal of the Government
Order would show that the writ petitioner appeared before the Additional
Chief Secretary to the Government on 23.12.2025 along with his
advocate and defended his case. Thus, the rules of natural justice has
been followed. The Government Order issued in G.O.Ms.No.248 states
that the Government verified the revenue records and as per the records
and the plan marked detail, the subject property has been classified as
'Nilaviyal Paathai' and therefore it is to be treated as Public Pathway in
view of RSO 26 Clause 15. The findings of the Government are
categorical with reference to the revenue records placed before the
Government.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that a suit for
declaration has been instituted by the petitioner in O.S.No.110 of 2025
on the file of the Sub Court, Kangayam. If at all the petitioner claims
__________
Page4 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:32:54 pm )

WP No. 20612 of 2026
any right contrary to the revenue documents considered by the
Government, it is for him to establish the same before the civil court. As
far as the present writ petition is concerned, the subject land admittedly
stands in the name of the petitioner and is a Patta land.
5. In this regard, Clause 25 of the Revenue Standing Order 26 (RSO
26) reads as under:

"15.Encroachments on plan-marked details:-- A plan-
marked channel or pathway running in a patta land is a
Government land. Eviction of encroachment in such
lands need be invoked only in cases where the
encroacher has interfered with the plan marked detail so
as to close its entrance to and exit from his lands. In the
case of pathways and cart tracks which have been used
by the public till recently, the ryot should not be allowed
to shift the course of the details to suit his own
convenience.

6. In view of Clause 15, removal of encroachment in plan marked
channel or pathway running in a patta land can be enforced if the
pattadhar interfered with the plan marked detail so as to close its
entrance and exit from his land. The very purpose and object of marking
__________
Page5 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:32:54 pm )

WP No. 20612 of 2026
Nilaviyal Paathai, Cart track etc., in a Patta land is to ensure that other
land owners should have access to reach their lands for agricultural
purposes or for any other purpose. In the event of causing obstruction
by the patta holder, it will result in restraining the other owners to reach
their land that being the very purpose of RSO 26 Clause 15, public
interest in this regard has to be protected.
th
7. Learned counsel for the 5 respondent furnished a copy of the
plan marked detail which would show that survey was conducted in the
year 1950 under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Survey and Boundaries
Act, 1923 and the particular portion of the subject land has been
earmarked as Nilaviyal Paathai ie., Public Pathway and therefore the
obstruction caused by the petitioner sought to be removed.
8. The revenue records and plan marked details are considered by
the Revenue Tahsildar, District Collector and the Government
elaborately in the context of the dispute raised between the parties. The
petitioner, in addition, filed a civil suit for declaration which is pending.
Under these circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that in
__________
Page6 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:32:54 pm )

WP No. 20612 of 2026
respect of the plan marked detail, the changes marked as pathway
within the said portion of the Patta land, possession vests with the
Government, and that being so it is to be treated as public pathway and
any encroachment by third party or obstruction by the Pattadhar has to
be removed and the pathway is to be protected for the benefit of people
using that pathway.
9. With the above observations, the writ petition stands dismissed.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
(S.M.S.,J.) (R.R.V.,J.)
04-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
KST
__________
Page7 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:32:54 pm )

WP No. 20612 of 2026
To
1. The Additional Chief Secretary to
Government, Revenue and Disaster
management department, secretariat,
Chennai – 600009
2. The District Collector
Collectorate, Palladam road,
Tiruppur - 641604.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer
Dharapuram, Tiruppur District.
4. The Revenue Tahsildar
Kangayam taluk, Tiruppur District.
__________
Page8 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:32:54 pm )

WP No. 20612 of 2026
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.
AND
R.RAJESH VIVEKANANTHAN J.
KST
WP No. 20612 of 2026
04-11-2026
__________
Page9 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 01:32:54 pm )