Madras HC Dismisses Resident’s Four-Year-Delayed Challenge To Lake-Encroachment Notice, Gives 10 Days To Explain Before Removal Proceeds

In brief

The question

Whether the writ petition challenging the 29 March 2022 Form III notice should be rejected for delay and laches

The court held

The Court dismissed the writ petition, with no order as to costs, and closed any connected miscellaneous petitions

It also directed

It allowed the petitioner ten days from the date of the order to submit an explanation in response to the notice, which the authorities were to consider before continuing enforcement and removing encroachments identified in the water body

01Facts

The petitioner challenged a Form III notice dated 29 March 2022, issued by the fourth respondent concerning alleged encroachment on Vilinjiambakkam lake/lake inlet and proposing removal of the petitioner’s residence

p. 1 · p. 2 · ¶ 1

The writ petition was filed approximately four years after the notice was issued

p. 2 · ¶ 2

The State submitted that enforcement action was underway, commercial constructions had already been removed, and action was being taken to remove other encroachments and disconnect electricity connections

p. 3 · ¶ 4

02Issues

i.Whether the writ petition challenging the 29 March 2022 Form III notice should be rejected for delay and laches

p. 2 · ¶ 2

ii.Whether enforcement action to remove the identified encroachment from the lake could proceed, subject to the petitioner being given an opportunity to submit an explanation

p. 3 · ¶ 5–6

03Law Applied

A writ petition may be rejected for laches where the challenged action is questioned after an unexplained or substantial delay

p. 2 · ¶ 2

The Court stated that encroachments in water bodies cannot be permitted and that water bodies must be protected in the public interest.

p. 3 · ¶ 5

Relying on the Full Bench decision in T.K. Shanmugam v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2015 (5) LW 397, the Court reiterated that encroachments in water bodies are to be removed by following the procedure under the Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Act, 2007

p. 3 · ¶ 5

04Reasoning

The Court found that the notice had been issued in 2022 and challenged only after approximately four years, and rejected the petition on the ground of laches

p. 2 · ¶ 2

It also noted that enforcement action had commenced and emphasised the public interest in protecting the lake

p. 2 · ¶ 3 · p. 3 · ¶ 4–5

Without halting that action, the Court permitted the petitioner to submit an explanation and directed the authorities to consider it before proceeding

p. 3 · ¶ 6