Disposed

Christoper Selvaraj v. The District Collector

Madras HC8 Sept 2022WP(MD)/21379/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenges improper sewage canal work by the Panchayat President, causing water stagnation. The court, taking consent to dispose at the admission stage, directed the respondents to decide the petitioner's representation within six weeks without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents 1-3 to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 12.08.2022 within six weeks.

Christoper Selvaraj Vs The District Collector — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.21379 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 08.09.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD

¶6

W.P(MD)No.21379 of 2022

Christopher Selvaraj

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Tuticorin District.

¶11

2.The Director, Rural Development and Directorate of Panchayat, Chennai – 600 015.

¶12

3.The Block Development Officer, Alwarthirunagari Panchayat Union, Thenthiruperai, Eral Taluk, Tuticorin District.

¶13

4.The President, Mookuperi Panchayat, Mookuperi, Tuticorin – 628616.

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to initiate proceedings under Sections 204 and 205 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act 1994 against the fourth respondent and to restore the petitioner's street namely Poonga Street in

¶16

1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.21379 of 2022

¶18

Mookupeeri Village to its original position by considering the petitioner's representation to the respondents dated 10.08.2022.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For Respondents : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar Government Pleader for R1 to R3

¶20

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

(Order of the Court was made by R.MAHADEVAN, J. )

¶23

The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to initiate proceedings under Sections 204 and 205 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, against the fourth respondent and to restore the petitioner's street, namely, Poonga Street in Mookupeeri Village to its original position, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 10.08.2022.

¶24

Heard Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai, learned counsel for the petitioner

¶25

and Mr.P.Thilak Kumar, learned Government pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶26

2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

W.P.(MD)No.21379 of 2022

¶28

Alleging that though the District Collector, Madurai District,

¶29

allocated the funds for the purpose of construction of sewage water canal in all the streets in Mookupeeri Village Panchayat, to drain excess rain water, the fourth respondent – President of Mookuperi Panchayat, has not carried out the abovesaid work properly, defeating the object and purpose of the project and due to improper laying of sewage water canal, the rain water gets stagnated in some places, the petitioner submitted a representation to the second respondent on 12.08.2022.

¶30

Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is suffice, if a direction is issued to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 12.08.2022 in accordance with law, within a time frame.

¶31

Since the petitioner has restricted his relief only to dispose of his representation, notice to the fourth respondent is dispensed with.

¶32

In view of the limited relief sought for, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider and pass orders on the representation of the

¶33

3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

W.P.(MD)No.21379 of 2022

¶35

petitioner dated 12.08.2022 within a period of six weeks from the date of

¶36

receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶37

[R.M.D., J.] [J.S.N.P., J.]

¶38

08.09.2022

¶39

Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No

¶40

pkn

¶41

¶42

1.The District Collector, Tuticorin District.

¶43

2.The Director,

¶44

Rural Development and Directorate of Panchayat, Chennai – 600 015.

¶45

3.The Block Development Officer, Alwarthirunagari Panchayat Union, Thenthiruperai, Eral Taluk, Tuticorin District.

¶46

4.The President, Mookuperi Panchayat, Mookuperi, Tuticorin – 628616.

¶47

4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶48

W.P.(MD)No.21379 of 2022

¶49

and J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.

¶50

R.MAHADEVAN, J.

¶51

pkn

¶52

W.P(MD)No.21379 of 2022

¶53

08.09.2022

¶54

5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Christoper Selvaraj v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Christoper Selvaraj v. The District Collector

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

Meenakshi Sundari.S.a Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

V.Pethimaharajan, Vs the Principal Secretary

P.Chidambaram, S/O.Periyasamy Vs the Director of Fisheries

I. Robert Chandra Kumar Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Murugesan. S Vs The District Collector

M.P. Rammohan Raja Vs State of Tamil Nadu