Unauthorised Occupant of River Poramboke land

“Unauthorised Occupant of River Poramboke land”

Show cause notice to the unauthorised occupant of poramboke land cannot be evicted straightaway without issuing show cause notice:

In Gooda Srinivasulu Naidu v. The Collector of Chengalpattu and 2 others, 1997 (III) CTC 106, the Madras High Court observed this finding:

In this case, a person was in occupation of Ac.2.00 of river poramboke land and doing agricultural activities since 1952. He was served B-Memo notice every year by Revenue authorities for his unauthorised occupation and he was paying assessment regularly to the Govt.

Under the Land Encroachment Act 1905:

Such unauthorised occupant of poramboke land can be evicted from it by issuing prior show cause notice under section 7 of the said Act. Such notice under sec.7 of the said Act is mandatory. Therefore the Collector or the Tahsildar (Deputy Tahsildar or Revenue Inspector or any specified officer by the State Govt.) cannot straightaway issue any order to evict under Sec.6 of the Act, without issuing show cause notice under sec.7 of the Act.

Sec.7 of the Land Encroachment Act 1905:

“Sec.7: Prior notice to person in occupation: Before taking proceedings under Sec.6 of the Act the Collector (or Tahsildar or Deputy Tahsildar or Revenue Inspector or any authorised officer or any other officer specified by the State Govt (not being an authorised officer) as the case may be shall cause to be served on the person reputed to be in unauthorised occupation of land being the property of Govt. a notice specifying the land so occupied and calling on him to show cause before a certain date why he should not be proceeded against under Sec.6 of the Act.Such notice shall be served in the manner prescribed in Sec.25 of the Tamil Nadu Revenue Recovery Act, 1864, or in such other manner as the State Govt. by rules or orders under Sec.8 may direct.Provided that no such notice shall be necessary in the case of any person unauthorisedly occupying any land, if he had been previously evicted from such land under Sec.6 or if he has previously vacated such land voluntarily after the receipt of a notice under Sec.5-B or under this Section.

The Madras High Court further held that when a power is vested with an authority under the statute, that power must be exercised in accordance with the procedure prescribed. Therefore any departure therefrom cannot be easily tolerated.

Other High Courts:

The Division Bench of the Madras High Court and other High Courts were also expressed the same view, that summary eviction proceedings proposed under Sec.6 is held to be invalid for non-issue of a prior notice contained under Sec.7 of the Act.

 **