M.Iyyandurai, v. The Executive Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE:28.03.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM W.P.No.11268 of 2016 & WMP No.9773 of 2016 M.Iyyandurai .. Petitioner -Versus1.The Executive Officer Tharamagalam Panchayat Salem.
2.The Assistant Director of Panchayats Salem Region, Salem District.
3.Gowtham Construction rep. by its Prop.Babu @ Panchiannan .. Respondents Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of proceedings of the first respondent vide proceedings made in tender notification R.C.No.281/2015/A1 dated 5.2.2016 and culminated in awarding the contract in favour of the 3rd respondent and to quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.C.Swamy for C.Senthilnathan For Respondents : Mr.K.J.Sivakumar - R1 Govt.Advocate Mr.M.L.Mahendran - R2 Govt.Advocate
O R D E R
Heard Mr.M.C.Swamy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.K.J.Sivakumar, learned Government Advocate accepting notice for the first respondent and Mr.M.L.Mahendran, learned Government Advocate accepting notice for the second respondent.
2.The petitioner's case is that the first respondent Panchayat is attempting to form a thar road in his private patta land.
Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents 1 & 2 and since the said representation was not considered, the petitioner is before this Court.
3.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent, on instructions submitted that a thar road was already in existence, which was formed by the first respondent in 2005 and at present, since the said thar road has become unusable and in a damaged condition, the first respondent has decided to re-lay the road and the particulars of the said road is mentioned in the 'Register of Road'. Further, it is stated that the Work Order has already been issued to the third respondent on 25.02.2016 itself. 4.Therefore, at this stage, the question of quashing the tender notification does not arise, since already the Work Order has been issued to the third respondent, the challenge to the tender notification is therefore not maintainable. However, the petitioner claims that the land in question is his private land and in support of the same, the petitioner relies on the sale deed dated 31.12.1990 and other revenue records. If that be the case, then the petitioner has to pursue his representation which was submitted to the second respondent on 18.02.2016.
5.Accordingly, while dismissing the Writ Petition, liberty is granted to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation in a proper manner to the second respondent along with the copy of this order and on receipt of the same, the second respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders on merit and in accordance within a period of two weeks thereafter. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
r p a Sd/- Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar To
1. The Executive Officer Tharamagalam Panchayat Salem.
2.The Assistant Director of Panchayats Salem Region, Salem District.
+ 1 cc to Mr.K.J.Sivakumar, Advocate Sr 19132 + 1 cc to Mr.C.Senthilnathan, Advocate Sr 18963 + 1 cc to The Govt.Pleader, Sr 19594 KR/30/3/16 W.P.No.11268 of 2016