Madras HC Gives Kallakurichi Officials 12 Weeks to Remove Identified Public-Pathway Encroachments After Due Process

In brief

The question

1. Whether the authorities should be directed to act on the petitioner’s representation and conduct a survey and demarcation of the alleged public pathways.

The court held

The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing respondents 3 and 4 to complete the enforcement process—including affording the encroachers an opportunity and removing the identified encroachments—within twelve weeks from receipt of a copy of the order.

It also directed

No costs were awarded.

01Facts

The petitioner sought a direction requiring the authorities to survey and demarcate alleged public cart tracks/pathways in specified survey numbers in Thagamtheerthapuram and Poondi villages, identify and remove encroachments, and restore the pathways to their recorded width.

p. 2 · p. 3 · ¶ 1

The request followed the petitioner’s representation dated 13 June 2026.

p. 2 · p. 3 · ¶ 1

In response to the petition, the State informed the Court that a survey had been conducted, encroachers identified, enforcement action initiated, and Form I notices issued.

p. 3 · ¶ 2 · p. 4 · ¶ 3

02Issues

i.1. Whether the authorities should be directed to act on the petitioner’s representation and conduct a survey and demarcation of the alleged public pathways.

p. 2 · p. 3 · ¶ 1

ii.2. Whether the authorities should be directed to remove the identified encroachments after following the applicable procedures and affording the encroachers an opportunity to be heard.

p. 4 · ¶ 4

03Law Applied

The Court referred to the procedures contemplated under the “relevant statutes and rules in force,” directing that enforcement action be taken in accordance with them and that affected encroachers be afforded an opportunity before removal.

p. 4 · ¶ 4

The order does not identify any particular statute, rule, or precedent. Its operative principle is that removal of identified encroachments must follow the applicable legal procedure and afford the affected persons an opportunity to be heard.

p. 4 · ¶ 4

04Reasoning

The authorities’ submission that a survey had been conducted, encroachers identified, and Form I notices issued addressed the petitioner’s request for administrative action.

p. 3 · ¶ 2 · p. 4 · ¶ 3

Since further action remained necessary, the Court directed the Tahsildar and Block Development Officer (respondents 3 and 4) to proceed under the applicable statutes and rules, provide the encroachers an opportunity, and then remove the identified encroachments.

p. 4 · ¶ 4

The Court did not itself determine the boundaries or extent of any encroachment.

p. 4 · ¶ 4