Encroachment case: Madras HC rejects Sastra’s plea against eviction reaffirming public land protection

Encroachment case: Madras HC rejects Sastra’s plea against eviction in a long-running dispute involving government land in Thanjavur district, delivering a firm message on the protection of public property. The Madras High Court has upheld the state government’s decision to remove encroachments and directed authorities to clear over 31 acres of land within a fixed time frame.

The court made it clear that government land belongs to the public and cannot be occupied or retained without legal authority. Emphasising constitutional responsibility, the bench ruled that courts cannot allow continued possession of public land when the state has decided to use it for official purposes.

The judgment brings to an end nearly three decades of litigation surrounding the land, which has remained under dispute for years due to multiple legal challenges.

Encroachment case: Madras HC rejects Sastra’s plea against eviction after years of litigation

Encroachment case: Madras HC rejects Sastra’s plea against eviction following a detailed examination of the case history and government records. The land in question measures 31.37 acres and is classified as government land. Authorities stated that the area was originally earmarked for public use and later planned for prison-related development.

The High Court observed that once the government takes a policy decision regarding the use of its land, courts should not interfere unless there is a clear violation of law. In this case, the bench found no such violation and upheld the eviction notice issued by the revenue authorities.

The eviction notice, first issued in 2022, directed the university to vacate the land. The institution had challenged both the notice and the rejection of its representation seeking relief. However, the court ruled that the revenue officials acted within their legal powers.

The judges stressed that encroachers cannot claim ownership or permanent rights over government land, regardless of how long the occupation has continued. Length of possession, the court said, does not convert unlawful occupation into a legal right.

Encroachment case: Madras HC rejects Sastra’s plea against eviction setting firm deadline

Encroachment case: Madras HC rejects Sastra’s plea against eviction with clear directions to the authorities to act swiftly. The court instructed the revenue department to proceed with eviction within four weeks from the date of receiving the order. If required, police assistance may be used to ensure the land is cleared peacefully and lawfully.

The court also addressed the issue of alternative land. It clarified that offering substitute land is entirely at the discretion of the government and cannot be demanded as a right by those found to be encroaching. Accepting or rejecting such proposals rests solely with the state.

The ruling underlined that allowing encroachments to continue would set a dangerous precedent and weaken the protection of public assets. The bench noted that repeated litigation over the same issue should not be used as a tool to delay lawful action by authorities.

Officials believe the decision will strengthen future efforts to reclaim government land across the state, especially in cases where disputes have dragged on for years. Also Read: Madras HC rejects Sastra’s plea against eviction

Conclusion

The Madras High Court’s ruling closes a long-standing legal battle and reinforces the principle that government land must remain protected for public use. With a strict timeline for eviction, the judgment sends a clear signal that encroachments, regardless of their duration, will not be legally sustained.