(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the Form-III proceedings dated 23.07.2025 issued by the 5th respondent under the Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachments Act, 2007, and the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in Na.Ka.No.4630610/2026/Oi.4 dated 03.09.2026 permitting the removal of 58 trees (45 coconut trees, 3 mango trees and 10 palm trees) standing on the bund of the water channei (odai) leading to foreshore of Ponperumal Kanmoi, in 346/1 and 346/2, Kulasekarankottai Village, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District and the consequential impugned Tender Notice issued by the 5th respondent in Letter No.1-9/26/Ko.13/A.E.1/Tha.Aa/2026 dated 09.09.2026 inviting tenders for auction sale of trees and quash the same as illegal and consequently forbear the respondents 1 to 10, their men, agents or anyone claiming under them, from removing or in any manner interfering with the trees standing on the petitioners land and on the bund maintained by the petitioner comprised in S.F.No.346/1 and 346/2.)

Heard both sides.

2. The writ petitioner is a resident of Kulasekarankottai Village in Vadipatti Taluk. He challenges the Form III notice issued by the fifth respondent herein. It is seen that Form I notice issued by the jurisdictional Tahsildar (R7) reached the office of the fifth respondent. Based on the same, Form II notice was issued on 24.06.2025. Upon receipt of the same, the petitioner offered his objections on 03.07.2025. The fifth respondent herein vide communication dated 21.07.2025 called upon the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Tahsildar with regard to the objections raised by him to Form I. Even without giving breathing time to the petitioner herein, Form III notice came to be issued on 23.07.2025.

3. The 11th respondent herein filed W.P.(MD)No.10664 of 2026 for removing the encroachments in the petition mentioned odai. The writ petitioner herein was shown as 10th respondent therein. It was submitted that though Form III notice was issued in July 2025 and had not been challenged, it had not been enforced. Taking note of the said submission, vide order dated 16.04.2026, we directed the fifth respondent to enforce Form III notice issued by him. The jurisdictional police were also directed to offer necessary protection. At this stage, this writ petition has been filed.

4. The writ petitioner on the face of it is guilty of laches. Form III notice was issued way back in July 2025. He had come to this Court only in September 2026. He has woken up only after the 11th respondent herein obtained an order from this Court. But we do not propose to non-suit the petitioner on the ground of laches. The doctrine of laches is a discretionary rule. If only third party rights have intervened, we will invoke the said doctrine to show the door to the litigant. But that is not the case here.

5. After conducting survey, Form I notice was not issued to the encroacher concerned. On the other hand, it was sent directly to the jurisdictional authority under Tamil Nadu Protection of Tanks and Eviction of Encroachment Act, 2007.

6. The specific case of the petitioner herein is that without issuing survey notice, Form I notice was finalised. When the fifth respondent herein had relegated the petitioner to go before the Tahsildar, the said remedy could been frustrated by issuing Form III notice within two days. We are of the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench in the decision reported in 2010 (3) MLJ 771 (T.S.Senthil Kumar Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu). It was held therein that even though the Tank Protection Act does not provide for issuance of notice, the principles of natural justice will have to be read into it.

7. In these circumstances, we direct the 7th respondent herein to issue fresh survey notice to the petitioner herein. The petition mentioned odai shall be measured & surveyed in the presence of the petitioner as well as the 11th respondent. Needles to say, the petitioner and the 11th respondent are obliged to extend their fullest cooperation and not adopt any obstructionist tactics. A formal order shall be passed by the 7th respondent dealing with the writ petitioner's objections. The impugned Form III notice will be subject to the outcome of the aforesaid exercise. If an adverse order is passed, breathing time of two weeks will be given to the petitioner so that he can exhaust his remedies.

8. The petitioner apprehends that the 11th respondent is attempting to convert the petition mentioned odai into a cart track. The learned counsel for the 11th respondent vehemently denies the said insinuation. But the fact remains that running of the odai had been abruptly arrested.

9. We direct that the petition mentioned odai should never be converted into a cart track. The learned Additional Government Pleader informs the Court that the survey exercises shall be completed within a period of four weeks.

10. The Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.