Judgment :- Satish K.Agnihotri, J. 1. The petitioner claiming to be a resident of Oorandivalasu village, Arasanatham post, Attur Taluk, Salem District, has come up with this writ petition, seeking a direction to the first respondent, i.e. the District Collector, Salem to consider and take action on the petitioner's representation dated 10.11.2014. In the said representation, the allegation of the petitioner is that the second respondent had encroached upon the river poramboke, obstructing his way as well as other similarly situated persons to their respective lands. 2. Pursuant to the earlier representation dated 3.1.2012 to Tahsildar, the Tahsildar vide communication dated 11.5.2012 informed the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Attur Taluk to take necessary enforcement action for removal of encroachment in the Odai Poramboke (River poramboke), which comes under the jurisdiction of the department. The Public Works Department, by written communication dated 6.6.2012 asked the Tahsildar to send Form-1 giving complete details of the land allegedly encroached by the second respondent. The petitioner had also deposited the cost towards expenses for the land survey on 11.7.2012. The Tahsildar vide letter dated 19.10.2012 called upon the police station to provide security for the purpose of survey. Thereafter, the Public Works Department by communication dated 6.11.2012 to Tahsildar informed that the boundaries of the encroachment in Survey No.93 does not come under the jurisdiction of the Public Works Department. Thus, it is for the revenue department-Tahsildar to take necessary steps for removal of encroachment. 3. The Tahsildar asked the police station for adequate police protection for removal of encroachment on 31.5.2013. It appears that thereafter, noting has happened and files have been travelling from one place to another place, which has driven the petitioner to file the instant representation dated 10.11.2014. 4. The first respondent in his counter affidavit dated 27.3.2015 recording that there were several encroachments as under, had issued notice under Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. Thereafter, an appropriate enforcement action will be taken on consideration of the representation, if any made by the alleged encroacher. S.No. Name of t he Encroacher Survey No. Classification Total Extent Enjoy-ment extent Type of Enjoyment 1 Palanivel S/o.Kandasamy 93 Govt. Odai Promboke 0.78.5 0.03.0 Agricultural 2 Rani W/o.Chinnasamy 93 0.78.5 0.00.5 Agricultural 3 Chinnappan S/o.Palanimuthu (2nd Respondent in this Writ) 93 Govt. Odai Promboke 0.78.5 0.04.5 Bore Patti (Vagai trees, Coconut trees)- respondent-2 4 Senthamilselvi W/o.Raendran 93 Govt. S.No. Name of t he Encroacher Survey No. Classification Total Extent Enjoy-ment extent Type of Enjoyment 1 Palanivel S/o.Kandasamy 93 Govt. Odai Promboke 0.78.5 0.03.0 Agricultural 2 Rani W/o.Chinnasamy 93 0.78.5 0.00.5 Agricultural 3 Chinnappan S/o.Palanimuthu (2nd Respondent in this Writ) 93 Govt. Odai Promboke 0.78.5 0.04.5 Bore Patti (Vagai trees, Coconut trees)- respondent-2 4 Senthamilselvi W/o.Raendran 93 Govt. Odai Poramboke 0.78.5 0.07.5 Pathway (individual encroachment) Plaintiff 5 Sundresan S/o I.Mannathi Padayachi 93 Govt. Odai Promboke 0.78.5 0.02.5 Agricultural 6 Nataraan S/o.Kandasamy 93 Govt. Odai Promboke 0.78.5 0.00.5 Agricultural 7 Raendran S/o.Angamuthu 93 Govt. Odai Promboke 0.78.5 0.02.5 Agricultural 5. The learned counsel for the second respondent would submit that he be permitted to raise the question of jurisdiction also in his representation. 6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we are of the view that if objection in respect of the jurisdiction is raised, the same may also be considered by the authorities before passing the order under Section 6 of the Act and taking consequential enforcement action. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. This writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs.