Revenue Records Prevail Over Claims Of Public Pathway Encroachment: Madras HC

The Madras High Court has slammed the door on a petitioner seeking the removal of alleged encroachments on village land, ruling that oral claims of a public pathway cannot override official classification in revenue records. A division bench comprising Justice M. Dhandapani and Justice N. Dilip Kumar heard the writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus to direct the district authorities to clear structures from a specific survey number, which he claimed was a traditional public pathway.

Key Takeaways

Revenue Record Superiority

Factual assertions regarding land usage as a pathway fail if the official A-Register and revenue documents classify the land for specific public buildings.

Public Utility Legitimacy

Structures like Noon Meal Centres and Panchayat buildings are considered valid public purposes when situated on land classified as Gramanatham.

Evidentiary Burden

Petitioners must provide documentary evidence to disprove government land reclassifications under schemes like the Natham Nilavari Scheme.

Judicial Verification of Land Classification

To resolve the dispute, the Madras High Court summoned the original A-Register and other relevant revenue records from the Revenue Department. The Madras High Court scrutinized the history of the land, noting that the original Survey No. 28, spanning 7 acres and 35 cents, was originally classified as Naduvapatti Gramanatham.

Under the Natham Nilavari Scheme, this survey number was subdivided, and the subject land in Survey No. 229/1 was assigned for public structures. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: “A perusal of the said records makes it clear that the subject land was originally classified as Naduvapatti Gramanatham and subsequently, Survey No. 229/1 was assigned and utilised for the aforesaid public purposes. However, there is nothing in the revenue records to indicate that Survey No. 229/1 was classified or recorded as a pathway.”

The Court held that in the absence of any record indicating the land's status as a pathway, the petitioner's contention was legally untenable. The Court has following directions:

"Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs."

Ratio

The classification of land in official revenue records, particularly those subdivided under the Natham Nilavari Scheme, is the final authority in determining the character of the land; mere long-term usage by residents does not confer the legal status of a 'public pathway' if the A-Register indicates otherwise.

Background

The petitioner, a resident and farmer of Naduvapatti Village, moved the High Court alleging that the 4th respondent and local authorities had encroached upon a traditional public pathway used by 500 households. He claimed that the construction of a Noon Meal Centre, a Panchayat building, and a tin shed on Survey No. 229/1 obstructed public access.

The Government Advocate, however, produced records showing the land was classified as 'Gramanatham' and had been legally subdivided for the very public buildings the petitioner sought to remove. Finding no evidence of a 'pathway' classification in the history of the survey number, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed the petition, refusing to grant the Mandamus.

Case Details:
Case No.: W.P(MD)No.13558 of 2023
Case Title: T.Rengaraj v. The District Collector, Tenkasi District and Others
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr.M. Prabu, Advocate
For the Respondent(s): Ms.J.Saranya, GA (R1 to R3); Mr.R.J.Karthick (R4)

Source: 2026 CaseBase(MAD) 21232