Alleged encroachment must be determined through a joint survey before remedial action.

The petitioner asserted that land measuring 30 × 60 feet had been granted to him on 14 October 1957 and that, after he constructed on it, the adjacent Police Department demolished part of the property and encroached upon it.

He had made representations seeking a survey and removal of the alleged encroachment.

The record included correspondence in which the Police Department sought a survey; the respondents also submitted that a survey was required to determine whether encroachment had occurred.

The petitioner sought, among other reliefs, directions to survey and demarcate the land, remove the alleged encroachment, and grant permission to construct.

1. Whether the Assistant Director of Land Records should be directed to conduct a survey of the petitioner’s property in the presence of the petitioner and the jurisdictional Police Department.

2. Whether the Court could direct removal of the alleged encroachment before a survey established its existence and extent.

The petition invoked Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.

The Court’s reasoning applied the principle that an alleged encroachment cannot be determined on assertion alone where the relevant boundaries have not been surveyed; a joint survey should first establish the factual position, after which the affected party may pursue appropriate remedies in accordance with law.

The petitioner alleged that the Police Department had encroached on his granted property, but the record also showed that a survey had been requested and had not yet been conducted.

The Court therefore considered the alleged encroachment unverified and held that it could not be accepted without survey evidence.

Since both the correspondence and the respondents’ submissions indicated that a survey was necessary, the Court directed the Assistant Director of Land Records to conduct one in the presence of the petitioner and Police Department officials.

If the report shows encroachment, the petitioner may seek its removal by approaching the jurisdictional Tahsildar in accordance with law.

The Court did not itself order removal of the alleged encroachment or grant permission to construct.

No order as to costs was made.