School Operator’s Bid to Clear Alleged Encroachments on Joint Track Fails as Madras HC Finds It Is Patta Land, Not a Public Pathway

The petitioner, who runs a school in S.F. No. 146/1, sought a mandamus directing respondents 1–6 to remove alleged encroachments by respondents 7 and 8 in S.F. No. 181/1B, Moppiripalayam Village.

The Tahsildar stated that the pathway in S.F. No. 181/1B was not a public pathway and that the land was patta land, not Government land; accordingly, revenue authorities could not initiate eviction proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act.

The Court examined the “A” Register, which recorded the land as a joint cart track belonging to Palani Gounder and nine others.

The Court relied on the revenue classification in the “A” Register to determine the nature and ownership of the disputed land.

It accepted that the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act did not provide a basis for revenue authorities to evict persons from land recorded as private patta land, rather than Government land.

The judgment cited no statutory provision, precedent, or separate legal test.

The “A” Register showed that S.F. No. 181/1B was a joint cart track classified as patta land belonging to Palani Gounder and nine others.

On that record, the Court treated the pathway as a private arrangement among the patta holders, rather than a public pathway.

Since the petitioner’s claim for official removal of the alleged encroachments depended on the land being a public pathway, and the authorities could not use the Land Encroachment Act to evict persons from patta land, the Court found no basis to grant the requested mandamus.

No costs were awarded.