Madras HC Rejects Landowners’ Plea To Remove Neighbours’ Wall, As Officials Said Disputed Land Was Private Patta Property

The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus directing the authorities to consider their representation dated 26 September 2025 and remove an alleged wall encroachment on a public road in Survey No. 2/6, Valayampattu Village, said to obstruct access to their land in Survey No. 2/8

The Block Development Officer’s counter stated that a survey found no encroachment: Survey No. 2/8 belonged to the petitioners, while Survey No. 2/6 was patta land belonging to respondents 4 and 5; the revenue records did not identify the disputed land as a paattai or vandipaathai

The petition was brought under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking mandamus

The Court cited no statute, precedent, or separate legal test in its reasoning. It disposed of the petition on the factual position stated in the Block Development Officer’s counter affidavit: the survey found no encroachment, and the relevant revenue records did not identify the land as a public pathway

The Court considered the authorities’ counter affidavit, which reported that Survey No. 2/6 was private patta land belonging to respondents 4 and 5 and that no public pathway was recorded there

On that factual basis, it concluded that no further consideration of the petition was necessary

The Court dismissed the writ petition, declining to direct consideration of the representation or removal of the alleged encroachment