This court disposed of a writ petition challenging a rejection of bill sanctions by Panchayat officials due to an efficacious appeal remedy available under the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act without adjudicating disputed facts.
Liberty to file an appeal under Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act within four weeks. No 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.9959 of 2017
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 11.12.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
W.P.(MD)No.9959 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD)No.7626 of 2017
Marimuthu
... Petitioner
versus
1/8
W.P.(MD)No.9959 of 2017
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order in Na.Ka.Vu.E.2/526/2017 dated 18.05.2017 passed by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to sanction bills in 9 additional works and 6 bore-well works done by the petitioner based on resolution passed by the Administrative Council in Srivilliputtur Panchayat Union.
2/8
W.P.(MD)No.9959 of 2017
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Anandan
For R1 to R6 : Mr.P.T.Thiraviam, Government Advocate For R7 : No appearance
ORDER
The petitioner claims that he has executed certain works under the scheme of “State Disaster Fund, Scheme of Rural Development, Thai Scheme and Panchayat Union General Fund Work” in the 7th respondent Panchayat during the year 2012-2013, 2013-2014 and 2014-2015.
3/8
W.P.(MD)No.9959 of 2017
respondents 1 to 6, based on the counter affidavit and written instructions, submits that there is no record available in the Panchayat Union to show that the petitioner has executed additional works as claimed by him. The petitioner's father was the Chairman of the Panchayat Union at the relevant point of time. Taking advantage of that, the petitioner has created a resolution by the Panchayat as if he has executed certain additional works. According to the Government Advocate, the petitioner has not executed any additional works and for the works executed by him, amounts have already been paid to the petitioner. He further submits that the writ petition is also not maintainable and the petitioner is having an appeal remedy before the District Collector under Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998.
4/8
W.P.(MD)No.9959 of 2017
works apart from the works which has been allotted to him for execution of certain work under the Scheme of State Disaster Fund, Scheme of Rural Development, Thai Scheme and Panchayat Union General Fund Work in the Panchayat. The respondent officials claim that the petitioner's father was the Chairman of the Panchayat Union. Taking advantage of the same, the petitioner has created a resolution in his favour as if he has executed additional works. In the affidavit itself, the petitioner claims that on the assurance given by the officials, he has executed nine additional works and six bore-well works. Moreover, the petitioner, being the son of the Chairman of the Panchayat Union, ought not to have participated in the tender process in the Panchayat Union. The petitioner claims that he has participated and has also obtained works from the respondents Panchayat.
facts in the writ petition. Since the petitioner is having an efficacious
5/8
W.P.(MD)No.9959 of 2017
appeal remedy, this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal in terms of Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1978, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
11.12.2023
ogy NCC : Yes / No. Index : Yes / No. Internet : Yes / No.
To
Rural Development Department, Srivilliputtur Panchayat Union, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District.
6/8
W.P.(MD)No.9959 of 2017
Srivilliputtur Panchayat Union, Srivilliputtur Panchayat Union, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District.
7/8
W.P.(MD)No.9959 of 2017
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
ogy
W.P.(MD)No.9959 of 2017
11.12.2023
8/8
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition is maintainable given the availability of an efficacious appeal remedy under Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Marimuthu
The District Collector, Virudhunagar District
The Assistant Director of Panchayat, Rural Development Department, Virudhunagar District
The Special Officer cum the Assistant Director of Auditing, Rural Development Department, Srivilliputtur Panchayat Union, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District
The Block Development Officer cum The Commissioner, Srivilliputtur Panchayat Union, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District
The Assistant Engineer, Rural Development Department, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District
B.PUGALENDHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
