Appeal dismissed. Bench held that dispute over septic tank location relative to a bore well involves disputed facts requiring civil trial. No fundamental right involved; writ jurisdiction inappropriate. Upheld Single Judge's dismissal.
The writ appeal was dismissed with liberty given by the Single Judge; no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.A.(MD) No.8 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 06.11.2019 CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.VINEET KOTHARI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.A.(MD) No.8 of 2019
B.Nagalakshmi @ Saratha Hariharan
... Appellants
-vs1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai. 2.The Commissioner of Corporation, Zone 4, Madurai Corporation, Department of Water Supply and Sanitation, Madurai District, Madurai. 3.The Junior Engineer, Department of Water Supply and Sanitation, Zone 4, Madurai Corporation, Madurai. 4.The Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board, Opp. To Mattuthavani Bus Stand, Melur Main Road, Madurai.
5.Mrs.Janaki ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Appeal has been filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order dated 11.12.2018 passed in W.P.(MD) No.24279 of 2018 by a learned Single Judge of this Court.
Prayer in WP(MD). 24279/ 2018 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to remove the septic Tank situated within the premises of the 5th respondent in Plot No.126, Balaji Nagar, Kovallan Nagar Extension, Pallanganatham Post, Madurai, as it is contaminating the fresh water source, based on the report of the 4th respondent within a stipulated period of time.
1/4
W.A.(MD) No.8 of 2019
For appellant : Ms.T.K.Akalya For R1 & R3 : Mr.A.K.Baskarapandian Spl.Govt.Pleader For R2 : Mr.R.Murali For R4 : Ms.Porkodikannan For R5 : Mr.R.Subramanian
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by THE HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE]
The appellant / petitioner B.Nagalakshmi @ Saratha Hariharan has filed this intra Court appeal, aggrieved by the order dated 11.12.2018, made in W.P.(MD)No.24279 of 2018 whereby, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant / petitioner with the following observations:-
“4.It could be seen that there is a dispute between two persons, who are neighbours and whether the bore well is situated next to the house of the fifth respondent or not is question of fact and has to be decided by letting in evidence and the said facts cannot be gone into by this Court by passing orders in the writ petition. It is left open to the parties to go before the proper forum and file a petition and seek remedy, if they are aggrieved. There is a civil dispute between the parties regarding factual aspect of construction of septic tank and this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same. There is no fundamental right involved in this dispute and hence, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Writ Petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.”
2/4
W.A.(MD) No.8 of 2019
appellant in the backyard of her house and the bore well is covered by a cement pipe from which the water is taken out for drinking purposes and other purposes. The septic tank created by the respondent No.5 appears to be outside the boundary wall of the appellant and therefore, we do not find any chance of mixing of bad water or polluted water of the respondent No.5 septic tank with the potable water of the appellant from her bore well.
Assistant Registrar // True Copy //
Sub Assistant Registrar(CS )
mpk
To
1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.
2.The Commissioner of Corporation, Zone 4, Madurai Corporation, Department of Water Supply and Sanitation, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Madurai District, Madurai.
3/4
W.A.(MD) No.8 of 2019
3.The Junior Engineer, Department of Water Supply and Sanitation, Zone 4, Madurai Corporation, Madurai.
+1 CC to Mr.PORKODI KARNAN, Advocate ( SR-96540[F] dated 06/11/2019 ) +1 CC to M/s.R.SUBRAMANIAN, Advocate ( SR-96666[F] dated 07/11/2019 ) +1 CC to SPL GP ( SR-96689[F] dated 07/11/2019 ) +1 CC to Mr.R.MURALI, Advocate ( SR-96796[F] dated 07/11/2019 ) +1 CC to Mr.S.THAMIZHARASAN, Advocate (SR-96841[F] dated 07/11/2019 )
W.A.(MD) No.8 of 2019 06.11.2019
MK (05.12.2019) 4P 10C
4/4
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the high court can interfere under Article 226 regarding a factual dispute about the proximity of a septic tank to a bore well affecting water supply.
Whether the dispute between neighbours regarding the construction of a septic tank is maintainable in writ jurisdiction.
Whether this court finds merit in the intra-court appeal filed against the dismissal of the writ petition.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
B. Nagalakshmi @ Saratha Hariharan
The District Collector, Madurai District
The Commissioner of Corporation, Zone 4, Madurai Corporation
The Junior Engineer, Department of Water Supply and Sanitation
The Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board
Mrs. Janaki
Dr. Vineet Kothari
G. R. Swaminathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
