P.Murugan v. The Principal Chief Engineer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.03.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN Writ Petition(MD)No.6058 of 2025 P.Murugan ..Petitioner Vs 1.The Principal Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Public Works Department, Chepakkam, Chennai.
2.The Superintendent Engineer, Water Resources Department, Vaipaaru River Basin Circle, Virudhunagar.
3.The Chief Engineer, Madurai Division, Gundaru River Basin, Public Works Department, Tallakulam, Madurai - 625 002.
4.Niraimathi ..Respondents 1/6
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct respondents 1 to 3 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.01.2025 and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to take necessary action as against the 4th respondent.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.M.Arumugam For Respondents : Mr.G.Suryananth Govt. Advocate (RR1 to 3)
ORDER
The petitioner seeks issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct respondents 1 to 3 to consider his representation dated 24.01.2025 and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to take necessary action as against the 4th respondent.
2. The petitioner states that he is a registered contractor with the Water Resources Department of the State of Tamil Nadu. He is a registered Class -II State Level Contractor. The certificate of registration has to be renewed from time to time. The current certificate of the petitioner is valid for this year. Hence, he gave an application for renewal of the registration. 2/6
3. At that time, the fourth respondent, the Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Gundaru River Basin Division, Tallakulam, Madurai, allegedly demanded illegal gratification for clearing the bills of the petitioner. Hence, he lodged a complaint on 24.01.2025 against her before the respondents 1 to 3. As the petitioner was not informed about further progress on his complaint, he has come forward with this writ petition.
4. Mr.G.Suryananth, learned Government Advocate, who took notice for the respondents 1 to 3. He states that immediately after receipt of the complaint from the petitioner, the second respondent took action.
5. The third respondent had called for an explanation from the fourth respondent on the complaint lodged by the petitioner and commenced an enquiry. An enquiry was also conducted on 04.03.2025, on which date the fourth respondent appeared before the second respondent. He further states that without waiting for the result of an enquiry, the petitioner has rushed to this court and filed the writ petition. He has also produced a copy of the proceedings of the Superintendent Engineer, Water Resources Department, Vaipaaru River Basin Circle, Virudhunagar, in Letter No.AA/05/KM/2025 3/6
dated 17.02.2025. He further states that the enquiry will be completed within a period of three weeks.
6. Perusal of the letter shows that the second respondent has acted on the representation of the petitioner. Hence, there need not be a Mandamus as sought for in this petition.
7. The statement of Mr.G.Suryananth that the enquiry will be completed within three weeks from today is recorded. It shall be treated as an undertaking given to this court by the second respondent. He shall complete the enquiry and take suitable action, if the allegations are found to be true.
8. This writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. 06.03.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes skn 4/6
To 1.The Principal Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Public Works Department, Chepakkam, Chennai.
2.The Superintendent Engineer, Water Resources Department, Vaipaaru River Basin Circle, Virudhunagar.
3.The Chief Engineer, Madurai Division, Gundaru River Basin, Public Works Department, Tallakulam, Madurai - 625 002.
5/6
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
skn Writ Petition(MD)No.6058 of 2025 06.03.2025 6/6