Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

K.Santha Vs The Special Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Home
Madras HC
2025
K.Santha Vs The Special OfficerK.Santha v. The Special Officer

Disposed¶38

K.Santha v. The Special Officer

Writ Petition (Mandamus) under Article 226 – Madurai Bench of Madras High Court (C.Saravanan, J.), 25.06.2025

Madras HC25 Jun 2025WP(MD)/17143/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sewage discharge into street; non-implementation of Commissioner, City Municipal Corporation Nagercoil order Na.Ka.No.12013/2024/E1 dated 21.02.2025; direction to implement order and take coercive steps after due notice; six weeks compliance timeline; drainage/sewer pipe blockage near JULEO HOMES; fifth respondent Julie (private party); writ of mandamus under Article 226 Constitution of India; Kanyakumari District; Nagercoil; District Collector; Public Works Department Executive Engineer; representation dated 08.01.2025; disposed with observations; no costs; C.Saravanan J; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; 25.06.2025; W.P.(MD) No. 17143 of 2025; G.Anto Prince; D.Ghandhiraj Special Government Pleader; Deepak Standing Counsel.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the third respondent to implement its order dated 21.02.2025 (Na.Ka.No.12013/2024/E1) and, if necessary, take coercive steps against the fifth respondent in accordance with law after due notice to the fifth respondent, within six (6) weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; writ petition disposed of with the above observations; no costs.

Why is it important?

The Court directed the third respondent to implement its order dated 21.02.2025 and, if necessary, take coercive steps against the fifth respondent in accordance with law, after due notice to the fifth respondent, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. ¶34

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the third respondent to implement its order dated 21.02.2025 (Na.Ka.No.12013/2024/E1) and, if necessary, take coercive steps against the fifth respondent in accordance with law after due notice to the fifth respondent, within six (6) weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; writ petition disposed of with the above observations; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.01.2025 in the light of the notice issued by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No. 12013/2024/E1 dated 21.02.2025 and take appropriate action. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

The Court directed the third respondent to implement its order dated 21.02.2025 and, if necessary, take coercive steps against the fifth respondent in accordance with law, after due notice to the fifth respondent, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Mandamus) under Article 226 – Madurai Bench of Madras High Court (C.Saravanan, J.), 25.06.2025 – W.P.(MD) No. 17143 of 2025 – Petitioner alleged that the fifth respondent continued to discharge sewage into the street despite the order dated 21.02.2025 of the third respondent (Commissioner, City Municipal Corporation, Nagercoil) passed in Na.Ka.No.12013/2024/E1 pursuant to the petitioner's complaint (order noting blockage of sewage/drainage pipe near JULEO HOMES and directing removal). HELD: direction to the third respondent to implement the order and, if necessary, take coercive steps against the fifth respondent in accordance with law after due notice to the fifth respondent, within six (6) weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; writ petition disposed of with the above observations; no costs.

A

W.P.(MD) No. 17143 of 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 25.06.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

W.P.(MD) No. 17143 of 2025

K.Santha ... Petitioner

Vs

The Special Officer, Honble Chief Ministers Special Cell, Chief Minister’s Address Department, Chief Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

The District Collector,, Collectorate, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District 629 001.

The Commissioner, City Municipal Corporation Office, 166, Balmore Road, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District 629 001.

The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department,

1/6

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

Nh-47B, Aralvaymozhi, Kavalkinaru Road, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District 627 108.

W.P.(MD) No. 17143 of 2025

Julie ... Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to consider the petitioner’s representation, dated 08.01.2025 in the light of the notice issued by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No. 12013/2024/E1, dated 21.02.2025 and take appropriate action.

For petitioner : Mr. G.Anto Prince

For respondents : Mr.D.Ghandhiraj Special Government Pleader for R1, R2 & R4 Mr.Deepak Standing Counsel for R3 *****

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed for the relief to direct the second respondent

to consider the petitioner’s representation, dated 08.01.2025 in the light of the notice issued by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No. 12013/2024/E1, dated 21.02.2025 and take appropriate action.

2/6

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

W.P.(MD) No. 17143 of 2025

The petitioner had earlier approached the third respondent against the

fifth respondent, pursuant to which the following orders came to be passed in Na.Ka.No.12013/2024/E1, dated 21.02.2025:

“4. Nfhupf;ifapd; kPjhd eltbf;if:

Nkw;gb gFjpapy; ,lk; ghu;itaplg;gl;lJ. thu;L vz;.44 -y; cs;s Gd;id efu; Kdprpgy; fhydpapy; JULEO HOMES vd;gtuJ tPl;by; ,Ue;J ntspNa tUk; fopT epupid njUtpy; cs;s kioePu; tbfhy; Xilapy; tplf;$lhJ vd;Wk; tPl;by; ,Ue;J tUk; mtUf;F nrhe;jkhd ,lj;jpy; cwpQ;R Foha; mikj;J mjpy; tpLkhW mwpTWj;jg;gl;Ls;sJ vd;w tpguk; njuptpf;fg;gLfpwJ.”

It is the case of the petitioner that the fifth respondent is still continuing

to discharge the sewage to the street, despite the order, dated 21.02.2025 of the third respondent.

Considering the same, there shall be a direction to the third respondent

to implement the order and if necessary, take coercive steps against the fifth respondent in accordance with law, after due notice to the fifth respondent within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

3/6

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

W.P.(MD) No. 17143 of 2025

This Writ Petition is disposed of, with the above observations. No

costs.

Index : Yes / No 25.06.2025 Internet : Yes / No apd To 1. The Special Officer, Honble Chief Ministers Special Cell, Chief Minister’s Address Department, Chief Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

The District Collector,, Collectorate, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District 629 001. 3. The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Nh-47B, Aralvaymozhi, Kavalkinaru Road, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District 627 108.

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

4/6

W.P.(MD) No. 17143 of 2025

C.SARAVANAN, J.

apd

W.P.(MD) No. 17143 of 2025

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

5/6

W.P.(MD) No. 17143 of 2025

25.06.2025

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

6/6

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 08.01.2025 in the light of the notice issued by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No. 12013/2024/E1 dated 21.02.2025 and take appropriate action.medium confidence¶18
2.
Whether the third respondent should be directed to enforce/implement its order dated 21.02.2025 against the fifth respondent, who was alleged to be continuing to discharge sewage to the street despite that order.medium confidence¶33
The court held
The Court directed the third respondent to implement its order dated 21.02.2025 and, if necessary, take coercive steps against the fifth respondent in accordance with law, after due notice to the fifth respondent, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶34

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶18

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Petitioner submitted a representation dated 08.01.2025 to the second respondent seeking its consideration and appropriate action.¶18
Prior proceeding
Petitioner had earlier approached the third respondent against the fifth respondent, pursuant to which the third respondent passed orders in Na.Ka.No.12013/2024/E1 dated 21.02.2025 (extracted in Tamil, referring to blockage of a sewage/drainage pipe near JULEO HOMES).¶28
Prior proceeding
Petitioner's grievance before this Court: the fifth respondent is still continuing to discharge sewage to the street despite the third respondent's order dated 21.02.2025.¶31

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
K.Santha¶7
G.Anto Prince
respondent
The Special Officer, Honble Chief Ministers Special Cell, Chief Minister’s Address Department, Chief Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.¶9
D.Ghandhiraj
respondent
The District Collector,, Collectorate, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District 629 001.¶10
D.Ghandhiraj
respondent
The Commissioner, City Municipal Corporation Office, 166, Balmore Road, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District 629 001.¶11
Deepak
respondent
The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Nh-47B, Aralvaymozhi, Kavalkinaru Road, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District 627 108.¶41
D.Ghandhiraj
respondent
Julie¶17

Coram

AI extract

C.SARAVANANauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 25 Jun 2025 · June
Registered: 23 Jun 2025
Case no.: WP(MD)/17143/2025
CNR: HCMD010731642025
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: C. Saravanan
Disposal: DISPOSED OF
Case type: W.P.(MD)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from C. Saravanan

T.Palaniyammal Vs The Tahsildar
24 Jun 2025
Jegadeesha Perumal Vs The Regional Passport Officer
24 Jun 2025
M.Paramasivam Vs The Secretary
24 Jun 2025
S.Balasingam Vs The Regional Passport Officer
25 Jun 2025
G.Sudalaimuthu Vs The District Collector
25 Jun 2025
V.Satheesh Vs The Secretary to the Government
25 Jun 2025

Cite this judgement

K.Santha v. The Special Officer, WP(MD)/17143/2025 (MAD), decided on 25 June 2025.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Petitioner submitted a representation dated 08.01.2025 to the second respondent seeking its consideration and appropriate action.
Petitioner had earlier approached the third respondent against the fifth respondent, pursuant to which the third respondent passed orders in Na.Ka.No.12013/2024/E1 dated 21.02.2025 (extracted in Tamil, referring to blockage of a sewage/drainage pipe near JULEO HOMES).

View full history

Bench / Coram

C.SARAVANAN

Parties & counsel