Madras High Court
Administrative and Public LawProperty and Real Estate Law

Police must protect revenue officials conducting surveys when the Revenue Department requests protection.

Nirmala vs The Superintendent of Police

Madras High CourtJUDGMENT: October 08, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Police must protect revenue officials conducting surveys when the Revenue Department requests protection.. Nirmala vs The Superintendent of Police. Madras High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The petitioner claimed ownership of 0.53 acres in Survey No. 42/9B, Thallihalli 2 Village, and sought a survey of the property.

Source reference: pp. 2–3

After her application was not considered, the High Court in an earlier writ petition directed that the property be surveyed.

Source reference: pp. 2–3

When the survey commenced, the fifth respondent objected.

Source reference: pp. 2–3

The Tahsildar subsequently proposed to conduct the survey on 15 October 2026, prompting the petitioner to seek police protection for it

Source reference: pp. 2–3
02

Issues

Whether police protection should be directed to enable the Revenue Department to carry out the court-ordered survey despite opposition from private respondents

Source reference: pp. 3, 6–7

Whether such protection should be limited to facilitating the survey, without enabling dispossession or resolving any private property dispute

Source reference: p. 7
03

Law Applied

The Court stated that a person may seek a survey of their property and that the Tahsildar has a duty to act on such a request.

Source reference: p. 6–7

Obstructing a statutory authority in the discharge of official duties may attract penal provisions, though the Court did not identify a specific statute or provision.

Source reference: p. 6–7

The police have a corresponding duty to enable the Revenue Department to perform its functions without hindrance.

Source reference: p. 6–7

Police protection for the survey is to be provided at the request of the Revenue Department, not at the request of either private party

Source reference: p. 6–7
04

Reasoning

The earlier order had directed a survey, and the Tahsildar had fixed a date to conduct it.

Source reference: pp. 6–7

Given the private respondent’s opposition and the Revenue Department’s duty to carry out the survey, the Court considered police assistance appropriate to prevent obstruction.

Source reference: pp. 6–7

It confined that assistance to facilitating the Revenue Department’s work and clarified that a survey could not be used to dispossess anyone.

Source reference: pp. 6–7

Any remaining dispute between the parties was left to the civil court.

Source reference: pp. 6–7
05

Holding

The Court disposed of the petition and directed the first and second respondents to provide police protection if the Tahsildar or Surveyor sought it to carry out the direction in the earlier writ petition.

Protection may be requested only by the Revenue Department.

Source reference: pp. 6–7

No person may be dispossessed under the guise of a survey; the petitioner may seek relief from the jurisdictional civil court for any unresolved grievance against the private respondents

Source reference: pp. 6–7
Madras High Court

Original Court PDF

NirmalavsThe Superintendent of Police

Madras High Court · October 08, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment