Revenue and police officials cannot alter possession; recovery must be pursued through the competent civil court.

The petitioner claimed ownership of property comprised in Survey Nos. 35/15, 35/20, 35/17 and 36/1, Gonur West Village, Mettur Taluk, Salem District, measuring approximately 3 acres and 34 cents.

He submitted a representation dated 5 September 2025 and an online application dated 1 June 2026 seeking survey and demarcation of the property, police protection for the revenue officials, and assistance in fencing the land.

The Tahsildar submitted that a survey had been attempted on 24 July 2026 but could not be completed because of obstruction by the private respondents.

The petitioner therefore invoked Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a writ of mandamus directing completion of the survey with police protection.

1. Whether the Tahsildar should be directed to complete the survey and demarcation of the petitioner’s property with police protection in view of the obstruction caused during the earlier survey attempt?

2. Whether police protection or official assistance could be granted for fencing the property?

3. Whether the revenue and police authorities could determine or restore possession of the property after the survey?

The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to issue a mandamus ensuring performance of the public authorities’ duty to conduct a survey and demarcate the property.

It applied the principle that police protection may be directed to facilitate lawful revenue proceedings, including survey and fixation of boundary stones, but cannot be used to assist a private party in fencing or securing possession of disputed property.

The Court further applied the settled principle that determination or recovery of possession must be pursued through due process before the competent Civil Court; revenue and police officials cannot take possession from one party or hand it over to another merely because of a survey result.

The Court noted that the Tahsildar had already acted upon the petitioner’s application by attempting the survey on 24 July 2026, but the exercise remained incomplete because of obstruction by respondents 3 to 12.

Since survey and boundary demarcation are administrative functions, the Court directed their completion with adequate police protection, after issuing notice to all interested persons, thereby balancing the petitioner’s request with the private respondents’ opportunity to participate.

However, the Court distinguished survey assistance from possession-related relief: police and revenue authorities could not be used to fence the property on the petitioner’s behalf or to alter existing possession.

Any claim for recovery of possession was left to be adjudicated by the competent Civil Court in accordance with law.

The Tahsildar was directed to complete the survey of the subject properties and fix boundary stones, with police protection from the Inspector of Police if required.

The exercise was to be completed within six weeks from receipt of the order, after notice to the petitioner, private respondents, and other interested persons.

The Court declined to grant police or official assistance for fencing, while clarifying that the authorities should not interfere with the petitioner’s lawful fencing activity, subject to the parties’ rights under law.

The authorities were expressly prohibited from taking over or handing over possession; any recovery of possession had to be sought before the competent Civil Court.

No costs were awarded.