Disposed

Samuthrakulam Abiviruthi v. 1.THE District Collector

Madras HC16 Oct 2023WP/30685/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ to quash an order regarding potential construction obstructing water course. Court found respondents submitted proposal dropped and no construction exists. Writ petition disposed of, connected case closed; respondents directed to remove any encroachment.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; connected W.P. closed. Respondents directed to remove any encroachment in water body and ensure no future encroachment.

Samuthrakulam Abiviruthi Vs 1.THE District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

1/4

¶2

W.P.No.30685/2003

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶4

DATED :: 16-10-2023

¶5

CORAM

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶9

W.P.No.30685 of 2003

¶10

Samuthrakulam Abiviruthi Committee, rep. by its President. ...

¶11

... Petitioner

¶12

-vs-

¶13

1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District.

¶14

2.The Commissioner, Puliankudi Municipality, Puliankudi, Tirunelveli District.

¶15

3.Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Melvaipparu Vadinilakottam, Rajapalayam. ... Respondents

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the third respondent vide ref.No.Vapa/Va 2/Ko.8/2000/321 M, dated 14.05.2003, quash the same and forbear the respondents herein from putting up any construction or any work or other developments in Survey Nos.219, 220 and 221 in

¶17

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

¶18

2/4

¶19

W.P.No.30685/2003

¶20

T.N.Pudukudi Village, Puliankudi, Sivagiri Taluk, Tirunelveli District, affecting, obstructing or likely to obstruct the water course of Samuthiram Odai leading to Samuthirakulam Tank.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.T.R.Rajaraman

¶22

For Respondents : Mr.A.Selvendran, Special Government Pleader.

¶23

ORDER

¶24

(By S.Vaidyanathan,J .)

¶25

Petitioner has come forward with this Writ Petition praying for issuance of

¶26

a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the third respondent vide ref.No.Vapa/Va 2/Ko.8/2000/321 M, dated 14.05.2003, quash the same and forbear the respondents from putting up any construction or any work or other developments in Survey Nos.219, 220 and 221 in T.N.Pudukudi Village, Puliankudi, Sivagiri Taluk, Tirunelveli District, affecting, obstructing or likely to obstruct the water course of Samuthiram Odai leading to Samuthirakulam Tank.

¶27

When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is submitted that there is no construction in the aforesaid Survey Numbers and a communication, dated 13.10.2023, addressed by second respondent Commissioner to the said effect has been produced by the learned Special Government Pleader. Accordingly, he submitted that there is no

¶28

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

¶29

3/4

¶30

W.P.No.30685/2003

¶31

encroachment; the proposal to construct shops has been dropped and, therefore, no further orders are required in this Writ Petition.

¶32

Recording the above submission, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected W.P.M.P.No.37420 of 2003 is closed.

¶33

We expect the respondents to remove the encroachment, if any, in the water-body and ensure no encroachment in future in the water-body.

¶34

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No dixit

¶35

(S.V.N.,J.) (K.R.S.,J.) 16-10-2023

¶36

¶37

1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District.

¶38

2.The Commissioner, Puliankudi Municipality, Puliankudi, Tirunelveli District.

¶39

3.Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Melvaipparu Vadinilakottam, Rajapalayam.

¶40

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

¶41

4/4

¶42

W.P.No.30685/2003

¶43

S.VAIDYANATHAN,J. AND K.RAJASEKAR,J.

dixit

W.P.No.30685 of 2003

16-10-2023

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

Samuthrakulam Abiviruthi v. 1.THE District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samuthrakulam Abiviruthi v. 1.THE District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R. Kandasamy Vs the Asst Settlement Officer

Kamakshi Sukumar, Vs The Divisional Engineer

N.Naveen Kumar and 2 others Vs a.Annadurai IAS and another

V.Sambandan Vs the State of Tamil Nadu, Rep.

P. Gnanasekaran Vs the Secretary

The Management Vs the Presiding Officer