Madras High CourtWP/39169/2015dismissed

V.Velumurugan, v. The District Collector,

2016-03-18Honourable Mr Justice T. S. Sivagnanam4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 18.03.2016 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM W.P.No.39169 of 2015 V.Velmurugan Petitioner Vs

1. The District Collector Collectorate Camp Office Race Course Road, Coimbatore - 18

2. The Secretary, Ministry of Rural Development Secretariat, Fort St.George Chennai -600 009

3. The Additional Director DRDA, Collectorate

4. The Block Development Officer Madukkarai Union Officer, Madukkarai, Coimbatore

5. The Panchayat President Arisipalayam, Natchipalayam Panchayat

6. The Panchayat President Malumichampatti Malumichampatti Panchayat Coimbatore,

7. The Panchayat President Palathurai, Palathurai Panchayat, Coimbatore

8. The Panchayat President, Maileripalayam, Maileripalayam Panchayat

9. The Panchayat President Seerapalayam, Seerapalayam Panchayat Office

10. The Panchayat President, Natchipalayam, Natchipalayam Panchayat Office

11. The Panchayat President, Ettimadai Town, Ettimadai Town Panchayat Office Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the payment as per the proceedings of the 4th respondent in Na.Ka.No.1671/ Aa2/2013 dated 12.12.2013 and the petitioner's representation dated 30.8.2014. For Petitioner ...

No Appearance For R1 to R3 ...

Mr. R.Rajeswaran Special Government Pleader For R4 to R11 ...

Mr. R.M.Muthukumar - - - - - -

O R D E R

This writ petition has been field praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the payment as per the proceedings of the 4th respondent in Na.Ka.No.1671/ Aa2/2013 dated 12.12.2013.

2. No representation for the petitioner. Heard Mr.R.Rajeswaran, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.R.M.Muthukumar, learned counsel for the respondents 4 to 11 and also perused the counter affidavit filed by the fourth respondent.

3. From the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is seen that the petitioner seeks for payment to be made in accordance with the proceedings of the fourth respondent dated 12.12.2013.

4. From paragraph No.4 of the counter affidavit filed by the fourth respondent, it is seen that earlier proceedings dated 12.12.2013 and 21.2.2014 have been revised and fresh proceedings have been passed on 12.5.2014. In the same paragraph, the fourth respondent has also furnished a detailed statement giving details of the name of the Panchayat, the name of the Hamlet, NYK report and actual status. A separate tabular column is also made with regard to the details of the payment made. Therefore, it is clear that the petitioner has been paid a sum of Rs.35,12,400/-.

5. In the light of the said development, the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted in this writ petition and the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. However, if the petitioner has any grievance as against the revised order, it is always open to him to work out his remedy in the manner known to law.

-s/dAssistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar ga To