K. Thambi Durai vs The Tahsildar, The Divisional Excise Officer, The Asst. ComissionerExcise Office and S. Shanmugam, President, Agricultural Co-operative Bank

A.K. Rajan, J.—The prayer in the writ petition is to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from interfering with the peaceful

possession and enjoyment of the petitioner''s bunk situated at Kavarai Street, Thirukkalukundram Town Panchayat, Chengalpattu District.

For the prayer asked for, only a civil suit can lie and not a writ petition. Further, the petitioner has no legal right to continue in possession of this

particular area.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is paying Rs. 2/- everyday for Panchayat for being in occupation. Further,

electricity supply had also given to him by Electricity Board and therefore he has a right to continue in possession. The learned counsel further

challenges the jurisdiction of the first respondent to evict the petitioner.

The first respondent is the Tahsildar; the property is a Government property; and therefore, the first respondent has got not only the right but

also a duty to evict the trespasser. Even assuming that the Village Administrative Officer authorised or permitted the petitioner to occupy a

particular area to put up a hut, it does not give him any right because the Village Administrative Officer has no right whatsoever either to lease or

authorise any person to occupy any Government land. The Government alone has got a right to issue licence to occupy. The petitioner has come to

Court only on the ground that the first respondent is trying to evict him. Inasmuch as the petitioner is an encroacher on the Government land, no

notice by the Tahsildar for evicting him is required. The Tahsildar has every right to evict the person and therefore the petitioner cannot have any

objection or grievance, if the Tahsildar evicts him. The prayer cannot be granted. Hence the petition is dismissed.