Writ petition closed as respondents already considered and rejected representation for service road on NH-83; petitioner free to challenge rejection order.
Writ petition closed; petitioner at liberty to challenge the rejection order dated 23.11.2023 ¶¶21-26
The writ petition is closed because the respondents have already considered the petitioner's representation dated 04.10.2023 and rejected it on 23.11.2023. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the rejection order. ¶¶21-26
W.P(MD)No.26800 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED :17.06.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P(MD)No.26800 of 2023
Palani Taluka Coconut Allied Product Manufacturers Association, Represented its President, S.Arun Kumar, S.F.No.375/1C, Kumarapalayam, M.N.Patti Post, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District. ... Petitioner
vs.
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to lay service road at Vayalur on National Highways 83 from Dindigul to Pollachi- four lane project by considering petitioner's representation dated 04.10.2023.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Selvanayagam For R1 : Mr.P.Karthick For R2 : Mr.M.Lingadurai Special Government Pleader
1/4
W.P(MD)No.26800 of 2023
ORDER
The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to lay service road at Vayalur on National
Highways 83 from Dindigul to Pollachi- four lane project by considering petitioner's representation dated 04.10.2023.
2.The learned Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the 2nd respondent submitted that the petitioner's representation, dated 04.10.2023, was already considered by the respondents as early as 23.11.2023 and the prayer of the petitioner was rejected.
3.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that even though the respondents have considered the representation as early as 2023, they did not communicate the same to the petitioner.
4.However, a copy of the said rejection order is served to the learned
Counsel appearing for the petitioner today, ie., on 17.06.2025. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the same. Since the prayer in the writ petition was already
2/4
W.P(MD)No.26800 of 2023
considered by the respondents, the writ petition is closed. No costs.
17.06.2025
NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes
Tmg
To:
The Divisional Engineer, National Highways, Palani, Dindigul District.
3/4
W.P(MD)No.26800 of 2023
S.SRIMATHY, J.
Tmg
ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.26800 of 2023
DATED :17.06.2025
4/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondents should be directed to lay service road at Vayalur on National Highways 83 (Dindigul to Pollachi four-lane project) by considering petitioner's representation dated 04.10.2023¶¶11
The writ petition is closed because the respondents have already considered the petitioner's representation dated 04.10.2023 and rejected it on 23.11.2023. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the rejection order.ratio¶¶21-26
Whether the writ petition is maintainable given that respondents have already considered and rejected the representation¶¶19
1 provisions across 1 enactments
How this case reached the court
Respondents considered petitioner's representation dated 04.10.2023 and rejected it on 23.11.2023¶¶19
National Highways Authority · 23.11.2023
Petitioner filed representation dated 04.10.2023 seeking service road at Vayalur on NH 83; respondents considered and rejected on 23.11.2023¶¶11
Palani Taluka Coconut Allied Product Manufacturers Association, Represented its President, S.Arun Kumar, S.F.No.375/1C, Kumarapalayam, M.N.Patti Post, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District¶¶7
D.Selvanayagam
The Project Director, National Highways Authority in India, Dindigul District, Dindigul¶¶9
P.Karthick
S.Srimathyauthor¶¶5
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
