Writ and contempt proceedings closed after patta grant, with liberty to pursue remedies preserved.

Ramani J. and P. Judith Kalaiselvi filed writ petitions challenging an order dated 24 March 2025 concerning their land and buildings in Survey No. 200, and sought protection against demolition, dispossession, or interference with their possession

The connected contempt petition alleged non-compliance with an earlier order directing the District Collector and Tahsildar to remove encroachments from the same survey number within twelve weeks

During the contempt proceedings, the District Collector granted pattas in favour of the writ petitioners.

The contempt petitioner then stated that he had no objection to closure of the contempt petition, while seeking liberty to pursue his remedy in accordance with law

1. Whether the contempt petition alleging non-compliance with the order dated 21 December 2023 should continue after pattas were granted to the writ petitioners and the contempt petitioner had no objection to its closure.

2. Whether the writ petitions challenging the order dated 24 March 2025 required adjudication in light of the subsequent development concerning the grant of pattas.

The writ petitions were brought under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The Court also considered the earlier order in W.P.(MD) No. 30727 of 2023, which had directed removal of encroachments within twelve weeks and initiation of appropriate action in accordance with law.

The order does not identify or apply any further statute, precedent, or substantive legal doctrine; the matters were disposed of on the basis of the subsequent development and the contempt petitioner’s submission.

The Court noted that the contempt petition concerned alleged non-compliance with the earlier direction to remove encroachments, but that pattas had subsequently been granted to the writ petitioners.

Given this development, and the contempt petitioner’s stated lack of objection to closure while reserving liberty to pursue other remedies, the Court closed the contempt proceedings and granted that liberty.

It also closed the connected writ petitions without deciding the merits of the challenge to the impugned order.

It also closed W.P.(MD) Nos. 9366 and 9367 of 2025 and the connected miscellaneous petitions; no substantive determination of the writ petitioners’ challenge was made.