The Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order by the District Collector directing the diversion of excess water. The Court held the order was not arbitrary and infringed on the petitioner's remedies regarding alleged bank damage.
The writ petition was dismissed with 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.P(MD)No.6720 of 2012
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 16.12.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU
W.P(MD)No.6720 of 2012
S.Kathiresan
... Petitioner
Vs.
5.A.K.Pandi ... Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, challenging the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.G.1/4166/2011 dated - 03.12 and quash the same as illegal.
1/5
W.P(MD)No.6720 of 2012
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu For R1 - R4 : Mr.G.Sivaraja Government Advocate
ORDER
The writ petitioner being aggrieved against the order passed by the District Collector in Na.Ka.No.G1/4166-2011, dated 12.03.2012, had approached this Court. Under the impugned order, the 1st respondent had declared that the excess water from Chinnakannur Kanmai shall be distributed to Sorikulam Kanmai and Siviyarenthal kanmai in proportion to the ayacuts of those Kanmai.
2/5
W.P(MD)No.6720 of 2012
submit that this order has been passed in the year 2012 and in the present
stage, due to the effects of the Public Works Department, there is no deficiency of water in Kanmai.
side.
excess water from one Kanmai to the other Kanmai. This order cannot be said to be an arbitrary order without reasons. The excess water cannot be allowed to be wasted and rightly, it has been directed to be diverted to two other Kanmais taking into account the respective ayacuts. I find no infirmity in the order passed by the 1st respondent. However, if it is to be accepted that as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that certain beneficiaries are trying to damage the banks of Kanmai for drawing excess water, it is for the petitioner to approach the concerned authorities for taking action. Such act of mischief cannot be taken into consideration to hold that the impugned order is illegal.
W.P(MD)No.6720 of 2012
to be considered and hence, the same is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
16.12.2022
Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No
gbg
To
4/5
W.P(MD)No.6720 of 2012
K.KUMARESH BABU,J.
gbg
Order made in W.P(MD)No.6720 of 2012
Dated: 16.12.2022
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order directing diversion of excess water from Chinnakannur Kanmai to other Kanmais was illegal and arbitrary.
S. Kathiresan
The District Collector, Virudhunagar District
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukottai
The Tahsildar, Tiruchuli Taluk
The Sub-Inspector of Police, Narikudi Police Station
K. Kumaresan Babu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
