M.Prabhakaran v. The Chief Engineer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 10.08.2023 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR M.Prabhakaran ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Chief Engineer, Office of the Chief Engineer, Public Work Department-Water Resource Department Office (WRD-PWD), Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Superintending Engineer, Office of the Superintending Engineer, Public Work Department-Water Resource Department Office, Tanjavur - 614 602.
3.The Executive Engineer, Vennaru Vadinila Division Office, Public Work Department-Water Resource Department Office (WRD-PWD), 4.Rajendran Executive Engineer, Water Resource Department, Vennar River Basin Division,
5.G.Thiruvalluvan, Public Information cum Technical Assistant to Executive Engineer, Water Resource Department, Vennar River Basin Division, ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st to 3rd respondents to conduct fresh inquiry into petitioner's complaint, dated 08.03.2023, by giving opportunity to the petitioner and direct the 1st respondent to take appropriate action against the erring 4th and 5th respondents. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Suriyamuthu For R1 to R3 : Mr.E.Vedabagath Singh Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed to direct the 1st to 3rd respondents to conduct fresh enquiry into the petitioner's complaint, dated 08.03.2023, by giving opportunity to the petitioner and direct the 1st respondent to take appropriate action against the erring 4th and 5th respondents.
2.It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner, being an activist involved in protecting the interests of the downtrodden people,
preferred an application under Right to Information Act, 2005, seeking certain information from the respondent Department. He was threatened by unidentified people claiming themselves to be the officials of the Department. Therefore, he preferred a complaint, dated 08.03.2023, to the higher authorities. However, it is the grievance of the petitioner that, without hearing the petitioner, the 3rd respondent unilaterally closed the petitioner's complaint without taking any action against the erring officials. Hence, the writ petition.
3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.E.Vedabagath Singh, learned Special Government Pleader, who takes notice for the respondents 1 to 3.
4.On a perusal of the letter addressed by the 3rd respondent to the petitioner, dated 18.04.2023, it appears that the respondents have already conducted enquiry based on the complaint given by the petitioner, dated 08.03.2023, and have instructed the subordinate officials not to involve in unwanted exchange of words with any of the parties. In such view of the matter, when the petitioner has not made out any specific allegations against any of the officials of the Department, merely on the
basis of general allegations, there cannot be any positive directions from this Court, particularly when the matter has already been seized and enquired into by the officials of the Department. 5.Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. 10.08.2023 mkn Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Nonspeaking order To 1.The Chief Engineer, Office of the Chief Engineer, Public Work Department-Water Resource Department Office (WRD-PWD), Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Superintending Engineer, Office of the Superintending Engineer, Public Work Department-Water Resource Department Office, Tanjavur - 614 602.
3.The Executive Engineer, Vennaru Vadinila Division Office, Public Work Department-Water Resource Department Office (WRD-PWD),
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
mkn 10.08.2023