Dismissed¶29

Karuppaiah .R v. The Secretary

Madras HC1 Dec 2025WP(MD)/1591/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintainability of writ petition under Article 226 against purely private party; mandamus for compensation and construction of compound wall refused; alternative remedy of civil suit for damages; drainage effluence damage to agricultural land; Madurai Integrated Textiles Park Limited (MITPL); Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; Krishnan Ramasamy, J.; W.P.(MD)No.1591 of 2023; dismissed with no costs.

What did the court decide?

A writ petition seeking relief only against a purely private party, with no relief sought against respondents 1 to 4, is not maintainable. ¶23

Karuppaiah .R Vs The Secretary — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.1591 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 01.12.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.1591 of 2023

R.Karuppaiah

... Petitioner

-vs-

The Secretary, Ministry of Textiles Department, Central Government of India, Uthyak Bhavan, Dr.Moulana Asath Road, New Delhi - 110 011.

¶11

2.The Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Secretariat, Department of Industries, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.

¶12

3.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai - 625 020.

¶13

4.The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, Vadipatti Taluk, Vadipatti, Madurai District - 625 018.

¶14

Page 1 of 5

¶15

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

¶16

5.The Director,

¶17

5.The Director, Madurai Integrated Textiles Park Limited, Thathampatti Village, Vadipatti Taluk and Post, Madurai District - 625 218.

¶18

W.P.(MD)No.1591 of 2023

¶19

... Respondents

¶20

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the fifth respondent's Company (MITPL) to pay compensation amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) and consequently, direct to build the southern side compound wall of the 5^th respondent's Company to prevent further damage by flow of drainage effluence into the petitioner's agricultural land.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Saravanakumar For R1 : No Appearance For R2 to R4 : Mr.S.Shanmugavel Additional Government Pleader For R5 : Mr.J.Alaguraam Jothi Standing Counsel

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus, directing the private respondent / fifth respondent to pay compensation. No relief has been sought against the respondents 1 to 4. In such circumstances, the Writ Petition is not maintainable as against a purely private party.

¶24

Page 2 of 5

¶25

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

¶26

¶27

W.P.(MD)No.1591 of 2023

¶28

2 . If the petitioner intends to claim compensation from the fifth respondent, the proper remedy is to file a civil suit seeking damages.

¶29

3 . In view of the above, the Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. No costs.

¶30

NCC : Yes / No 01.12.2025 Index : Yes / No smn2

¶31

To:-

¶32

The Secretary, Ministry of Textiles Department, Central Government of India, Uthyak Bhavan, Dr.Moulana Asath Road, New Delhi - 110 011.

¶33

2.The Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Secretariat, Department of Industries, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.

¶34

3.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai - 625 020.

¶35

_____________ Page 3 of 5_

¶36

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

¶37

W.P.(MD)No.1591 of 2023

¶38

4.The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, Vadipatti Taluk, Vadipatti, Madurai District - 625 018.

¶39

5.The Director, Madurai Integrated Textiles Park Limited, Thathampatti Village, Vadipatti Taluk and Post, Madurai District - 625 218.

¶40

Page 4 of 5

¶41

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

¶42

W.P.(MD)No.1591 of 2023

¶43

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

¶44

smn2

¶45

W.P.(MD)No.1591 of 2023

¶46

01.12.2025

¶47

_____________ Page 5 of 5_

¶48

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

Karuppaiah .R v. The Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karuppaiah .R v. The Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Apollo Tyres Limited Vs Union Of India

M/s.Khazana Jewellery Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Settlement Commission

Mrf Ltd. Vs Additional Director Dggi

Maheshkumar Vs The District Collector

P.Jeevananthan Vs The District Registrar

Arumugam.S Vs The State rep by its