Madras High CourtWP(MD)/9345/2018dismissed

Namachivayam v. The District Collector

2018-04-25Honourable Mr Justice A.M. Basheer Ahamed,Honourable Mr Justice C. T. Selvam2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.04.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.BASHEER AHAMED W.P.[MD].No.9345 of 2018 and W.M.P.(MD).Nos.8638 and 8639 of 2018 Namachivayam : Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.

3. The Tahsildar, Aruppukkottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

4. The Block Development Officer, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.

5. The Executive Officer, Aathipatti Village Panchayat, Kattakanjampatti, Aruppukottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

6. N.Ravi : Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the first respondent herein vide his proceedings in Na.Ka.Vu.E4/1235/2017, dated 15.09.2017 and quash the same.

For petitioner : Mr.A.Jayaramachandran For respondents 1to5 : Mr.M.Rajarajan Government Advocate

O R D E R

*********** [Order of the Court was made by C.T.SELVAM, J.] The present Writ Petition, by way of Public Interest Litigation, has been filed, challenging the order dated 15.09.2017 passed by the first respondent herein https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. It is seen that pursuant to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(MD).No.110 of 2017, dated

28.06.2017, the first respondent has found that the cremation ground would be shifted to Survey No.203, Vakaikulam Kanmaikarai, Aruppukkottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

3. The submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that even before the order of the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 28.06.2017 made in W.P.(MD). No.110 of 2017, Athipatti Grama Saba had taken a decision that the place identified for cremation purpose is a water body and it need not be utilized.

4. We find no merit in the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the place presently chosen is a water body, inasmuch as the order of this Court dated 28.06.2017 made in W.P.(MD).No.110 of 2017, specifically mentions that the intended site is the bund portion of water body. Finding no merit, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To