R.Ganesan v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 29.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY R.Ganesan ... Petitioner vs.
1.The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.
2.The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat), Karambakkudi Union, Pudukkottai District.
3.M.Murugesan 4.T.Suresh ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take action against the respondents 3 and 4 for the misappropriation of huge funds in the Jal Jeevan Mission Scheme functioned at Mangottai Panchayat, Karambakkudi Union and Taluk, Pudukkottai District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 05.08.2024. 1/6
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sevugaraja For RR 1 & 2 : Mr.J.Ashok Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by J. NISHA BANU, J.) The present Writ Petition has been filed as a Public Interest Litigation seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action against the respondents 3 and 4 for alleged misappropriation of substantial public funds under the Jal Jeevan Mission Scheme, implemented at Mangottai Panchayat, Karambakkudi Union and Taluk, Pudukkottai District, based on the petitioner's representation dated 05.08.2024. 2.According to the petitioner, the Jal Jeevan Mission Scheme, a flagship initiative of the Union Government aimed at providing piped water supply to every household, was implemented in Mangottai Panchayat. The third respondent was awarded the contract pursuant to a tender process and allegedly completed the work using pre-existing old pipeline infrastructure, while claiming payments for new pipeline installations. It is further stated that, although the 2/6
scheme covered 17 villages, only 10 villages were provided water tap connections under a separate fund from the 15th Finance Commission, and that funds under both schemes were misused. The petitioner contends that despite submitting a detailed representation dated 05.08.2024, no action has been taken by the authorities.
3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2. Perused the materials placed on record.
4.Upon perusal of the materials available on record, this Court is of the view that the allegations made by the petitioner involve disputed questions of fact and potential criminal misconduct, which are not appropriate for adjudication in a Writ Petition, more so under the guise of a Public Interest Litigation. The appropriate remedy available to the petitioner is to approach the competent law enforcement authorities by lodging a criminal complaint, in accordance with law. 3/6
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned police authorities or other competent forum by filing a criminal complaint with all supporting materials. There shall be no order as to costs.
[J.N.B.,J.] & [S.S.Y.,J.] 29.04.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes ps 4/6
To 1.The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.
2.The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat), Karambakkudi Union, Pudukkottai District.
5/6
J.NISHA BANU , J.
and S.SRIMATHY, J.
ps ORDER MADE IN DATED : 29.04.2025 6/6