Disposed¶33

R.Maharajan v. the District Collector

Madras HC24 Sept 2025WP/36274/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mandamus; removal of alleged illegal erection works and electrical post; drainage outlet work; T.S.No.118/1, 118/3, 113, 119 and 120; repeated objections; representation dated 23.05.2025; direction to respondents 4 & 7 to decide within four weeks; Article 226 Constitution of India; District Collector Thiruvarur; Tahsildar Mannargudi; Mannargudi Municipality; TWAD/TAWD; TANGEDCO; Madras High Court; M. Dhandapani J.; WP No. 36274 of 2025; WMP No. 40538 of 2025; disposed; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents 4 and 7 (Executive Engineer (sewerage) TAWD, Mannagudi and Executive Engineer Tangedco, Mannargudi) to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 23.05.2025 within four weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; writ petition disposed of; connected miscellaneous petition closed; no costs.

R.Maharajan Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the respondents to remove the alleged illegal erection works and electrical post done by them and to pursue due process of law for their work. +1 more

¶23

Ratio / Principle

Considering the facts and circumstances and the limited request of the petitioner, the Court directed respondents 4 and 7 to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 23.05.2025 within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶32

Key takeaways

With the above directions, the writ petition was disposed of; the connected miscellaneous petition was closed and no costs were awarded.ratio¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (M. Dhandapani, J.) — WP No. 36274 of 2025 with connected WMP No. 40538 of 2025, decided 24-09-2025. R.Maharajan filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents — the District Collector, Thiruvarur; the Tahsildar, Mannargudi Taluk; the Commissioner, Mannargudi Municipality; the TWAD/TAWD engineers; and the Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Mannargudi — to remove the alleged illegal erection works and electrical post done by them and to invoke due process of law, alleging the work was attempted despite his repeated objections and an unanswered representation. On the petitioner's limited request, the Court directed respondents 4 and 7 to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 23.05.2025 within four weeks from receipt of a copy of the order. Writ petition disposed of; connected miscellaneous petition closed; no costs.

¶1

WP No. 36274 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 24-09-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

WP No. 36274 of 2025 AND WMP NO. 40538 OF 2025

R.Maharajan

Petitioner(s)

The District Collector Thiruvarur.

¶11

2.The Tahsildar Mannargudi Taluk.

¶12

3.The Commissioner Mannargudi Municipality, Mannargudi.

¶13

4.The Executive Engineer (sewerage) TAWD, Mannagudi.

¶14

5.The Executive Engineer RWS Division, TWAD, Thiruvarur.

¶15

6.The Chief Engineer TAWD, Thanjavur

¶16

7.The Executive Engineer Tangedco, Mannargudi.

¶17

Respondent(s)

¶18

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

¶19

WP No. 36274 of 2025

¶20

PRAYER; This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to remove the illegal Erection works and Electrical Post done by the respondents and further extend the Direction in this course till respondents invoking the due process of law to initiate their work.

¶21

For Petitioner(s): Mr.A.Thinakaran For Respondent: Mr.P.Ganesan, AGP RR1 to 6 Mr.D.B.R.Prabhu R7

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to remove the illegal Erection works and Electrical Post done by the respondents and further extend the direction in this course till the respondents invoking the due process of law to initiate their work.

¶24

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of the property in T.S.No.118/1, 118/3, 113, 119 and 120 is owned by the neighbor in the southern side. The respondents were illegally tried and erect the drainage outlet work even repeated objection raised by the petitioner. In this regard, the petitioner made representation to the respondents and there is no reply or consideration. Hence, the present writ petition.

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court may direct the respondents to consider and pass orders on the petitioners

¶26

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

¶27

WP No. 36274 of 2025

¶28

representation within the stipulated time as fixed by this Court.

¶29

The learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the

¶30

representation will be considered and orders will be passed within the stipulated time as fixed by this Court.

¶31

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the

¶32

limited request sought for by the petitioner, this court directs the respondents 4 & 7 to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 23.05.2025 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶33