01Facts
The petitioner challenged the Tahsildar’s order dated 20 June 2024, which treated Survey No. 112/2 as patta land, and sought removal of alleged encroachments and restoration of a water channel
p. 2The State submitted that an inspection and the “A” Register showed Survey No. 112/1 was Government poramboke/vaari, while Survey No. 112/2 was patta land, with the patta standing in the name of Rajavel
p. 3The authorities had identified no encroachment in Survey No. 112/2
p. 302Issues
i.1. Whether the Tahsildar’s order treating Survey No. 112/2 as patta land should be quashed on the petitioner’s claim that it was a water channel encroached upon by respondents 4 to 9
pp. 2–3ii.2. Whether the authorities should be directed to remove encroachments from Survey No. 112/2 and restore the water channel
p. 203Law Applied
The judgment cites no statute, precedent, or specific legal doctrine.
The Court resolved the dispute by reference to the official land classification in the “A” Register and the authorities’ inspection findings
p. 304Reasoning
The Court accepted the State’s submission, supported by the “A” Register, that Survey No. 112/2 was patta land, distinct from Survey No. 112/1, which was classified as Government poramboke/vaari
p. 3As the authorities had found no encroachment in Survey No. 112/2, the Court held that no further consideration was required
p. 305Holding
The Court dismissed the writ petition, declined to order removal of encroachments or restoration of the water channel, made no order as to costs, and closed the connected miscellaneous petitions
p. 4Original Court PDF
K.SELVAKUMARvsTHE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
