N.Senthilkumar vs The District Collector — WP(MD)/14233/2026

Case under Others Section others. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 20th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCMD010675982026

Filing Number

WP(MD)/41552/2026

Filing Date

18-May-2026

Registration No

WP(MD)/14233/2026

Registration Date

19-May-2026

Judge

Honourable Mr Justice D.bharatha Chakravarthy , Honourable Ms.Justice R. Poornima

Coram

Honourable Mr Justice D.bharatha Chakravarthy , Honourable Ms.Justice R. Poornima

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

Land Acquisition ( 96 )

Sub-Category

Land Encroachment ( 3 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

20-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 30-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Others Section others

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.N.Senthilkumar

    Adv. PALANICHAMY V

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The District Collector

  2. 2.The Assistant Commissioner,

  3. 3.The Assistant Engineer,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 20-May-2026

    Honourable Mr Justice D.bharatha CHAKRAVARTHY,Honourable Ms.Justice R. PoornimaView PDF

    The Madurai Bench dismissed N. Senthilkumar's writ petition challenging an eviction order for a temple on Survey No. 243. The court found that the A Register clearly showed the land was government poramboke (waste) land, not temple property, and that Supreme Court precedent permits evicting places of worship on poramboke land. The court directed the petitioner to pursue interim relief through a pending civil suit (O.S. No. 3 of 2026) instead. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 20-May-2026

    For Admission (Land Encroachment)

    Honourable Mr Justice D.bharatha Chakravarthy , Honourable Ms.Justice R. Poornima

  4. 18-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP(MD)/14233/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Madurai Bench dismissed N. Senthilkumar's writ petition challenging an eviction order for a temple on Survey No. 243. The court found that the A Register clearly showed the land was government poramboke (waste) land, not temple property, and that Supreme Court precedent permits evicting places of worship on poramboke land. The court directed the petitioner to pursue interim relief through a pending civil suit (O.S. No. 3 of 2026) instead. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case