K. Sundaramoorthy vs The Tahsildar

P.D. Dinakaran, J.—Mr. G. Sankaran, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the Respondent.

According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the grievance of the Petitioner in the above writ petition is that the Respondent, having issued a notice u/s 5 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905, had without making any further enquiry into the matter proposed to evict the Petitioner. " The learned Counsel for the Petitioner further states that the impugned land is a "natham" land, in which, the Tahsildar has no jurisdiction.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the grievance of the Petitioner and the relief sought for in the above writ petition, it is suffice to direct the Respondents to proceed with the enquiry initiated under the Tamilnadu Land Encroachment Act and to pass appropriate final order within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, provided, the land in question is not classified as "natham". If the impugned land is classified as "Village Natham", it goes without saying that only the appropriate authority shall initiate action to evict the Petitioner as per the ratio laid down by this Court in Thillaivanam A.K. and Anr. v. District Collector, Chengai 1998 3 L.W. 603. Till then, the Petitioner shall not be dispossessed.

The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Consequently, W.M.P. No. l 1620 of 1999 is dismissed. No costs.