Madras High CourtWP/3027/2026dismissed

C.Kuberan v. The District Collector

2026-02-10Honourable The Chief Justice,Honourable Mr.Justice G.Arul Murugan6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10.02.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN and WMP No.3423 of 2026 C.Kuberan .. Petitioner -vs1.

The District Collector, Chengalpet District, Chengalpet.

The District Revenue Officer, O/o.The District Revenue Officer, Chengalpet District, Chengalpet.

The Tahsildhar, Chengalpet District, Chengalpet.

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengalpet District, Chengalpet.

The Director, C & E Market Road, Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107.

The Asst. Director, New Collectorate Complex, 4th Floor, D-Block, Vedharanyapuram, Chengalpet Taluk and District.

The Principal Chief Conservator (Wet-lands), of Forest & Chief Wild Life Warden, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015.

The Block Development Officer, Kattankolathur Panchayat Union, Chengalpet Taluk and District.

Tamizhmaran .. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 9 to consider the petitioner's representations dated 03.11.2025 and 10.11.2025 sent to take necessary action to have the water body channels for supply of water from the Kayarambedu Periya Eri to Nandhivaram lakes in and around adjacent agricultural lands, situated at Kayarambedu Village, Chengalpet Taluk, Chengalpet District, comprised in Survey Nos.83/2A, 85/1B, 2, 3, 4, 5, 1A, 86/1B, 2, 3, 99/1, 2, 3, 100/1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 2C, 3, 4, 102/1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 103/1B, 2, 3, 4, 110/6A, 112/1A, 1B, 116/1A, 1B, 2, 117/1G, 2, 128/1B1, 1B2A, 1B2B & 131/1C, measuring to an extent of 5.72.55 hectares or 14 acres 63 cents.

For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Thanjan For Respondents :

Mr.M.Habeeb Rahman Govt. Advocate, for RR 1 to 8 :

Mr.R.Thiagarajan for R-9 * * * * *

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) It appears that the petitioner is aggrieved by the purchase of land by private respondent No.9 from various persons of the village and development of layout, which, according to the petitioner, is affecting supply of water to the villagers.

2. Learned counsel, who enters appearance for 9th respondent, would submit that the petitioner has suppressed the fact that 9th respondent had purchased the land from petitioner's own brother. 2.1. In the petition, we find that, though in the affidavit it is stated that the 9th respondent purchased Nanja lands (agricultural lands) from various persons and formed layout, comprised in various survey numbers, petitioner has not disclosed the fact regarding sale of land by his own brother to the 9th respondent.

3. Therefore, without commenting upon merits of the case, we are not inclined to examine the validity of the project of the 9 th respondent at the instance of the present petitioner, who does not

appear to be a person approaching Court in pro bono, but appears to have some vested interest.

Petition is, accordingly, dismissed, leaving the issue open for consideration in appropriate case. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the interim application stands closed. (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ.) (G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.) 10.02.2026 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No sra

To 1.