Madras High CourtWP/13062/2017disposed of

Krishnan v. The State Of Rep By

2020-08-19Honourable Mrs Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 19.08.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA W.P.No.13062 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.13940 of 2017 & W.M.P.No.20676 of 2019 (heard through VC) Krishnan ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State rep by The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Tamil Nadu Government, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai 9.

2. The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Water Resource System, Dharmapuri 5.

3. The Superintending Engineer Public Work Department, Water Resource System, Thiruvannamalai District.

4. The District Collector, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.

5. The Superintendent of Police, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.

6. The Inspector of Police, Mahendra Mangalam Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

7. T.S.Iqbal (Contractor), Public Work Department No.3/1407 New Colony, R.S.Masothi Backside, Dharmapuri Town & Dt.

8. Subramani ... Respondents

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the Respondents 1 to 7 from any way or in any manner to form any channel in the petitioner's property Thimmarayan Halli Village in Karimangalam Taluk, Dharmapuri District comprised in Survey Number Nos.140/2 and 140/4 covered in patta No.43, Survey Nos.142/1, 142/2 covered in Patta No.400, Surve No.140/7, 142/9 covered in Patta No.579, Survey Nos.77/21 covered in Patta No.82, Survey No.51/1B covered in Patta No.102, Survey No.77/2B covered in Patta No.803 and in Velagala Halli Village comprised in Survey Nos.77/2C and 77/2E covered in Patta No.727 without any due process of Law.

* * * For Petitioner :

Mr.K.Gandhi Kumar For RR1 to 6 :

Mr.R.S.Selvam, Government Advocate For R7 :

Mr.P.Ebenezer Paul For R8 :

No Appearance (Served)

O R D E R

The petitioner has sought for a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the Respondents 1 to 7 from in any way or in any manner to form any channel in petitioner's property Thimmarayan Halli Village in Kasimangalam Taluk, Dharmapuri District comprised in Survey Number Nos.142/1, 142/2 covered in Patta No.400, Surve No.140/7, 142/9 covered in Patta No.579, Survey Nos.77/21 covered in Patta No.82, Survey No.51/1B covered in Patta No.102, Survey No.77/2B covered in Patta No.803 and in Velagala Halli Village comprised in Survey Nos.77/2C and 77/2E covered in Patta No.727 without due process of Law

2. The petitioner is the owner of the properties comprised in the survey numbers referred to above and it is his specific allegation that the seventh respondent with the aid of the eighth respondent trespassed into his patta land and attempted to form a water channel under the guise of contract obtained from the respondents 1 to 3. As the land belongs to the petitioner, in the event of any channel being laid on the same, due process of law has to be followed by acquiring the said land. However, since the same has not been done and thus, the acts of the respondents are illegal, a suit in O.S.No.45 of 2016 on the file of the District Munsif, Palacode, for permanent

injunction was filed. Admittedly, no injunction was granted in the suit and the suit is also said to be pending till today. In the meanwhile, the petitioner has rushed to this Court with the above writ petition and obtained an order of status-quo.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the seventh respondent, who is the Contractor, says that the contract was given to him by the respondents 1 to 3 for construction of an irrigation channel and the construction of the same is completed long back.

4. The only grievance of the petitioner is that his lands cannot be used without taking possession for the specific utilization by following the due process of law. From the facts, it is clear that there has been a construction of irrigation channel. The only thing that has to be ascertained is, whether the same has been laid on the property belonging to the petitioner in the Survey Numbers mentioned in the petition?

5. As already a comprehensive suit is filed, it is open to the petitioner to workout his remedy with respect to the damages caused, etc. in the suit. So far as this writ petition is concerned, as only a Mandamus is sought for by the petitioner seeking to restrain the respondents from doing any work without due process of law, the respondents 1 to 3 are directed to look into the issue and not to proceed further unless by due process of law.

6. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected writ miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The Secretary to Government, Tamil Nadu Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai 9.