Madras High CourtWP(MD)/7848/2015dismissed

S.C. Adaikkan, S/O Chinnan, v. The District Collector,

2016-10-17Honourable Mr Justice M. Govindaraj,Honourable Mr Justice S. Nagamuthu2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.10.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ W.P.[MD].No.7848 of 2015 and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2015 S.C.Adaikkan .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Madurai District.

2.The Additional Collector (Development) and Project Director, District Rural Development Agency (DRDA), Madurai - 625 020.

3.The Block Development Officer, (Vill.Panchayat), Kottampatti Panchayat Union, Kottampatti, Madurai District.

4.The Assistant Executive Engineer / Zonal Officer (Kottampatti), District Rural Development Agency (DRDA), Office of District Rural Development, Madurai.

5.The Union Engineer / Assistant Engineer, Kottampatti Panchayat, Madurai District.

6.The Panchayat President, Kambur Panchayat, Kottampatti Panchayat Union, Kambur, Madurai District.

.. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 5 to complete the construction of the Village Level Service Centre at Alangampatti Village, Melur Taluk, Madurai District by issuing the formal administrative sanction on the basis of the recommendation of the third respondent made in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.4178/2014/Thi.5, dated 10.02.2015.

For Petitioner : Mr.F.Deepak For respondents : Mr.M.Rajarajan, Government Advocate

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by S.NAGAMUTHU, J.] The petitioner has come up with this Public Interest Litigation seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 5 to complete the construction of the Village Level Service Centre at Alangampatti Village, Melur Taluk, Madurai District. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

3. In the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent, it is stated that the construction could not be completed in view of the pendency of the Writ Petition in W.P.(MD).No.9968 of 2015 before this Court. Since the matter is already sub judice in a different writ proceeding, the petitioner can work out his remedy in the said writ petition.

4.In view of the above, this Writ Petition is dismissed. However, it is open to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the other Writ Petition viz., W.P.(MD).No.9968 of 2015. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Writs) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Madurai District.