Ganesaraj .S v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.04.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN S.Ganesaraj ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

2.The Executive Engineer, District Rural Development, 3.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Rural Development, Tiruchendur, Thoothukudi District.

4.The Block Development Officer, (Village Panchayat), Sathankulam, 5.M.Antony Selvan ...Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to 1/6

take necessary action against the fifth respondent for the poor execution f water pipeline under Jal Jeevan Mission at Alagappapuram Village Panchayat and consequently direct the fourth respondent to provide Household Tap Connection in Alagappapuram Panchayat and ensure uninterrupted water supply to Alagappapuram Village Panchayat based on resolution dated 15.08.2022.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Karunanithi For Respondents : Mr.N.Muthu Vijayan Special Government Pleader for R1 to R3 Mr.R.Ragavendran Government Advocate for R4 Mr.J.David Ganesan for R5

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Mandamus, seeking a direction against the respondents 1 to 4 to take necessary action against the fifth respondent who is a Contractor at Sathankulam,

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the fifth respondent was allotted the work for putting up water pipeline at Alagappapuram Village 2/6

Panchayat. This was to provide water supply for about 500 houses in the said village. But it appears that the fifth respondent had not done the work to the satisfaction of the petitioner and there have been complaints that water pipelines had regularly broken and frequently damaged. This has affected the water supply. As a President, the public shifted their ire against the petitioner. To deflect the damages, he has now filed the present writ petition seeking a direction against the respondents 1 to 4 to initiate necessary action against the fifth respondent.

3. But, however, as Panchayat President, the petitioner has also necessary authority to initiate such action. If he has some hesitation on his part, he can always report the damages of the water pipelines and the expenses incurred in setting right those damages and forward a report to the Inspector of Panchayat/District Collector. But this Court cannot, in the absence of materials about the actual damage being caused, direct them to take action against the fifth respondent. 4.Though vakalat has been filed on behalf of the fifth respondent, there is no representation.

3/6

5. Mandamus in this nature cannot be issued as against any one of the respondents. The onus is on the petitioner herein to make out a case that the fifth respondent had not discharged the contract entrusted to him to the satisfaction of all. Therefore, as Panchayat President, he must initiate action and also examine the authority which he has and forward a report for further action. It is for him to explore such aspects as against the fifth respondent. So far as the village Panchayat is concerned, the petitioner as President is the custodian not only of the records but also has responsibility to provide amenities to the residents. Since a direction is issued to the petitioner, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

27.04.2023 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No ssb To 1.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

4/6

2.The Executive Engineer, District Rural Development, 3.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Rural Development, Tiruchendur, Thoothukudi District.

4.The Block Development Officer, (Village Panchayat), Sathankulam, 5/6

C.V. KARTHIKEYAN, J.

ssb 27.04.2023 6/6