01Facts
The petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking a Mandamus to compel the Erode City Municipal Corporation (Respondents 2 and 3) to remove an encroachment on a public road and tree at Thendral Nagar, Erode
p. 2The petitioner alleged that the 5th respondent installed a religious statue on a portion of the public road
¶ 2The petitioner contended that such installations are often the first step in a modus operandi to eventually construct permanent buildings, which obstructs traffic and becomes difficult for authorities to remove at a later stage
¶ 2A formal representation regarding this was submitted by the petitioner on 03.02.2026
p. 202Issues
i.1. Whether a Writ of Mandamus should be issued to direct the municipal authorities to remove the religious idol and associated encroachment from the public road
¶ 1ii.2. Whether the installation of religious statues on public roads is permissible in view of the right of road users to the free flow of traffic
¶ 203Law Applied
The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus
p. 2It applied the principle that public roads are intended for the benefit of road users and must be kept free of obstacles to ensure the free flow of traffic
¶ 2The Court further relied on the procedural requirements established under relevant municipal Statutes and Rules in force, which mandate that encroachment removal must be preceded by a field survey and the issuance of notice to the affected parties to satisfy the principles of natural justice
¶ 304Reasoning
The Court analyzed the petitioner’s evidence, noting that photographs showed religious idols installed beneath a tree on what appeared to be public land
¶ 3The Court validated the petitioner’s concern that encroachments in the form of religious idols often expand into permanent illegal structures, concluding that such obstructions must be addressed at the "initial stage" to prevent long-term public inconvenience
¶ 2the Court determined that it could not summarily order removal without factual verification. Consequently, it linked the legal requirement for a "field inspection and survey" to the administrative duty of the respondents to identify the exact nature of the encroachment
¶ 3The Court emphasized that while the law mandates the removal of obstructions from public paths, it equally requires the authorities to follow due process by providing the 5th respondent an opportunity to be heard before any coercive action is taken
¶ 305Holding
The High Court disposed of the Writ Petition by directing Respondents 2 and 3 to conduct a field inspection and survey to identify any encroachments
¶ 3-4The Court held that if encroachments are confirmed, the authorities must follow statutory procedures, including issuing notice and providing an opportunity for the 5th respondent or other encroachers to respond
¶ 3The Court ordered that this exercise be completed within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the order
¶ 3No costs were awarded
¶ 4Original Court PDF
A.PalanichamyvsThe District Collector,
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
