Alleged encroachment may be removed only after survey and due opportunity of hearing.

The petitioner claimed rights over 0.40.50 hectares of land in Survey No.382/2B, Velampatti Village, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District, covered by old Patta No.248 and New Patta No.133.

According to her, the land had been assigned free of cost under the Bhoodan Board Scheme in 1961 to her husband’s father, was subsequently inherited by her husband, and remained in their possession and cultivation.

Following her husband’s death on 13 December 2023, the petitioner claimed to have continued cultivating the land and paying the applicable revenue and taxes.

The Tahsildar issued an eviction notice dated 27 September 2023, which the petitioner challenged under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking quashing of the notice and protection against interference with her cultivation.

The respondents stated that the land would be surveyed in the petitioner’s presence, the documents produced by her would be considered, and any encroachment would be removed in accordance with law.

Whether the eviction notice dated 27 September 2023 could be acted upon without first giving the petitioner an effective opportunity to submit her explanation and relevant title or possession documents.

Whether the respondents could remove the alleged encroachment only after conducting a survey in the petitioner’s presence, considering the relevant land records, and following due process of law.

The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to ensure that administrative action affecting possession and cultivation is undertaken in accordance with law and principles of natural justice.

The Court applied the principle that a person facing eviction or removal for alleged encroachment must be afforded a meaningful opportunity to submit an explanation and supporting documents before coercive action is taken.

It further required the competent authority to verify the factual position through a survey in the petitioner’s presence and to remove any encroachment only in accordance with law and after providing due opportunity.

The Court did not finally determine the petitioner’s title or the legal validity of the Bhoodan assignment.

Instead, having regard to the petitioner’s claim of inherited possession and cultivation and the respondents’ undertaking to conduct a survey and examine the records, it treated the eviction notice as a show-cause notice.

This ensured that the petitioner could place her explanation, patta records, and other relevant documents before the competent authority.

The Court directed that the factual question of encroachment be determined through a survey conducted in her presence and that removal, if warranted, follow due process and an opportunity of hearing.

The petitioner was permitted to treat the notice dated 27 September 2023 as a show-cause notice and submit her reply and supporting documents to the fifth respondent within two weeks of receiving the order.

Thereafter, the respondents were directed to survey the property in her presence, consider the relevant land records, and, if encroachment was found, remove it only in accordance with law after providing due opportunity to the petitioner.

The entire exercise was to be completed within six weeks, and no coercive steps were to be taken in the meantime.

No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.