1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.08.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI and THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.P.(MD)No.9857 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 V.Koolu Servai ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The District Collector, District Collector Office, Madurai-20. 2.The Thasildar (L.A.), Land Acquisition Office Scheme – 1, Adi Dravidar Welfare Department, Collector Office Building, Madurai-20 .... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order made in Na.Ka.No.1346/86 A dated 09.08.2011 on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently forbearing the respondent their men or agent from interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the house bearing D.No.1/80 Vadapalangi Village of Madurai South Taluk. For Petitioner : Mr.J.Gunasheelan Muthiah For Respondents : Mr.R.Karthikeyan, AGP O R D E R (Order of the Court was made by P.JYOTHIMANI,J.) The Writ petitioner challenges the impugned notice issued by the 2nd respondent dated 09.08.2011, by which, the petitioner was stated to have encroached 0.19 cent, since the same has been allotted for Adi-Dravidars. The impugned order also shows that the petitioner has already been informed about the removal of encroachment as early as 1991. 2.The Writ petition is filed on the ground that the petitioner is a purchaser under a registered sale deed from one Naga Devar dated https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 13.07.1989. A reference to the said sale deed shows that what was purchased by the petitioner was an extent of 3 cents. However, in the impugned notice, it is stated that 0.19 cent has been encroached by the petitioner, which is a part of the property, stated to have been purchased by the petitioner. If that is so, it is for the petitioner to work out his remedy by approaching the appropriate Civil Court, which alone can appreciate the evidence and not by this Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by exchange of affidavits. 3.In such view of the matter, the Writ petition stands dismissed, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum as stated above. However, if the petitioner files any suit, within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, the Civil Court shall decide the same on merits and in accordance with law. Till filing of such civil suit as indicated above, the respondents shall maintain status quo as on today in respect of the possession of the property by the petitioner. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Collector, District Collector Office, Madurai-20. 2.The Thasildar (L.A.), Land Acquisition Office Scheme – 1, Adi Dravidar Welfare Department, Collector Office Building, Madurai-20. +1cc Mr.J.Gunasheelan Muthiah, Advocate, Sr.No.29747 W.P.(MD)No.9857 of 2011 30.08.2011 nbj SMA/12.9.2011/4C/2P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/