M/s.D.J.Water Supply Vs the District Collector

M/s.D.J.WATER SUPPLY Rep by its Proprietor, D.Jagadeesan, Son of Durai, having Office at No.33, Adhiparasakthi nagar, White Gate,Thimmasamudram, Kancheepuram District- 631 502.

¶10

..Petitioner(s)

¶11

Vs

¶12

The District Collector Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram.

¶13

The District Revenue officer Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram.

¶14

The Revenue Divisional Officer Kancheepuram, Kancheepuram District.

¶15

The Tahsildar Kancheepuram taluk, Kancheepuram District.

¶16

Page 1 of 7

¶17

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

WP No. 50058 of 2025

5. Gnanaprakasam

Respondent(s)

Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the 1st respondent in COLKPM 419 /2025 /U3 dated 14.11.2025 and quash the same as illegal, incompetent and ultravires and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to permit the petitioner to continue the water supply business under the name of DJ WATER SUPPLY at survey No.147/ 3A2, Thimmasamudram village, Kancheepuram Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

¶22

For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.Jayaprakash For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Rajesh, Govt. Advocate for R.1 to R.4

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The Writ Petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

¶25

“To call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the 1st respondent in COLKPM 419 /2025 /U3 dated 14.11.2025 and quash the same as illegal, incompetent and ultravires and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to permit the petitioner to continue the water supply business under the name of DJ WATER SUPPLY at survey No.147/ 3A2, Thimmasamudram village, Kancheepuram Taluk, Kkancheepuram District.”

¶26

Page 2 of 7

¶27

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

¶28

WP No. 50058 of 2025

¶29

The facts, in a nutshell, are as follows:-

¶30

2.1. The petitioner company has been carrying on a water supply business

¶31

in the name and style of “DJ Water Supply” since the year 2014. The said business is being operated from land belonging to Mrs. J. Meenakshi, the wife of the proprietor of the petitioner concern.

¶32

2.2. The petitioner would submit that before commencing the business all

¶33

the requisite licences and permissions had been obtained by them and the trade licence has been regularly renewed by paying the requisite fees. The petitioner would submit that the business is also duly registered under the Good and Service Tax and GST is being paid regularly.

¶34

2.3. While so, the petitioner’s brother, the 5^th respondent herein on

¶35

account of a personal animosity had filed WP.No.25755 of 2025 seeking direction to the authorities to consider his representation dated 18.01.2025 to take action against the petitioner alleging illegal extraction of groundwater. Pursuant to the orders passed by this Court on 15.07.2025, the revenue officials

¶36

Page 3 of 7

¶37

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

¶38

WP No. 50058 of 2025

¶39

had inspected the petitioner’s business premises on 26.07.2025 and during the inspection they had orally advised the petitioner to obtain necessary permission from the 3^rd respondent. In compliance of the said advice, on 31.07.2025, the petitioner had submitted a detailed representation to the 3^rd respondent seeking permission to continue his business and expressing willingness to pay any fee or comply with any condition prescribed by law. However, no action was taken on the said representation.

¶40

2.4. Meanwhile, the 4^th respondent by proceedings dated 29.07.2025

¶41

directed the petitioner to appear for enquiry. Accordingly, on 05.08.2025, the petitioner had appeared before the 4^th respondent and given a detailed explanation along with all supporting documents. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned for submission of the report by the 4^th respondent.

¶42

2.5. While things stood so, without waiting for the report of the 4^th respondent and without issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner, the 1^st respondent had passed the impugned order dated 14.11.2025 directing the sealing of the petitioner’s business premises on the ground that groundwater is being illegally extracted. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶43

Page 4 of 7

¶44

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

¶45

WP No. 50058 of 2025

¶46

3.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the records.

¶47

A mere perusal of the impugned order would clearly indicate that the

¶48

same has been passed without issuing any show cause notice or affording an opportunity of hearing to the interested parties and without awaiting the report of the 4th respondent. The principles of natural justice, which form the bedrock of the justice delivery system, mandate that no order shall be passed without affording the affected person an opportunity of being heard. A perusal of the impugned order clearly reveals that no such opportunity has been granted to the petitioner to put forth his case.

¶49

Therefore, the Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned order passed by the 1^st respondent dated 14.11.2025 is set aside and the matter is remitted back for fresh consideration of the representation of the 5^th respondent dated 18.01.2025. The 1^st respondent is directed to pass a speaking order, after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to all the interested parties and after receiving report from the 4^th respondent, within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶50

Page 5 of 7

¶51

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

¶52

WP No. 50058 of 2025

¶53

Since no adverse orders are being passed against the 5^th respondent and

¶54

the matter is only remitted back to the 1^st respondent for fresh consideration, notice to the 5^th respondent is dispensed with. No costs Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶55

02-01-2026

¶56

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶57

SHR

¶58

To

¶59