Dismissed

P.Senthil Kumar, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC17 Nov 2022WP/14656/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking a directive to notify the Tamil Nadu Ground Water (Development & Management) Act 2003. The court held the prayer infructuous as the Act was ultimately repealed by an Ordinance.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed. No costs.

P.Senthil Kumar, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.No.14656 of 2011

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 17.11.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR

¶6

W.P.No.14656 of 2011 and M.P.No.1 of 2011

P.Senthil Kumar

...Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by The Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat,

¶11

Chennai.

¶12

2.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Public Works Department.

¶13

3.The District Collector, Tirupur District, Tirupur. ...Respondents

¶14

Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 herein to notify the Tamil Nadu Ground Water (Development & Management) Act 2003 (Tamil Nadu Act 3 of 2003) in view of the assent granted by the Hon'ble President on 04.03.2003 to regulate and control the extraction, use or transport of groundwater and to conserve groundwater table against hazards of its over exploitation.

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

1/4

¶17

W.P.No.14656 of 2011

¶18

For Petitioner : M/s.N.Jothi for Mr.N.Manokaran

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.K.Tamilvendan Government Advocate

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This writ petition is filed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the

¶22

respondents 1 and 2 herein to notify the Tamil Nadu Ground Water (Development & Management) Act 2003 (Tamil Nadu Act 3 of 2003) in view of the assent granted by the Hon'ble President on 04.03.2003 to regulate and control the extraction, use or transport of groundwater and to conserve groundwater table against hazards of its over exploitation.

¶23

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that though the Government has enacted Tamil Nadu Ground Water (Development & Management) Act 2003 for regulating tapping of groundwater in Tamil Nadu, admitted that the said act having received the assent of the Hon'ble Governor, and notified was ultimately, by an Ordinance no.3, was repealed. It is settled that there cannot be a writ of mandamus directing the State to legislate. In view of the same, a writ of mandamus is not maintainable to direct the Government to legislative in a particular manner.

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/4

¶25

W.P.No.14656 of 2011

¶26

Considering the nature of prayer in the writ petition, this Court is of the

¶27

view that the prayer in the writ petition has become infructuous in view of the subsequent developments.

¶28

Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous. No

¶29

costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶30

17.11.2022

¶31

cda

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/4

W.P.No.14656 of 2011

S.S.SUNDAR. J.,

cda

1.The Chief Secretary to Government, The State of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Chennai.

¶38

2.The Secretary to Government, The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Public Works Department.

¶39

3.The District Collector, Tirupur District, Tirupur.

¶40

W.P.No.14656 of 2011

¶41

17.11.2022

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/4

P.Senthil Kumar, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Senthil Kumar, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A. Ayubkhan, Vs The District Collector

S.Sivaraj Vs the Asst. Registrar

Mrs.T.Meerabai Vs The Assistant Director

Sri Ganapathy Engineering Works Vs The Superintending Engineer/Civil

R.Sathish Vs The Regional Manager/

Sky Line Network Vs the Manging Director