Kamaraj Gm v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13.06.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN and W.M.P.(MD) No.12118 of 2025 Kamaraj.G.M ... Petitioner Vs

1. The District Collector, Tiruchirappalli District.

2. The District Revenue Officer, Tiruchirappalli District.

3. The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, Tiruchirappalli.

4. M/s. Nayara Energy Limited, Sreerosh Madhav Building, 2nd Floor, Old No.73/2, New No.58/2, New Awadi Road, Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010.

... Respondents 1/5

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent Nos.1 to 3 to forbear the 4th respondent and its agents from undertaking any work pertaining to construction of new service road on Chennai - Trichy NH - 38 from 294.657 km to 295.725 km in Siruganur Village, and revoke any no objection certificates issued in favour of the 4th respondent, by considering the representation dated NIL.09.2025. For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Venkatesh, For Respondent :

Mr.P.Thilak Kumar (R1 & R2) Government Pleader :

Mr.P.Karthik (R3) Standing Counsel

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.] The writ of mandamus has been instituted to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to forbear the fourth respondent and its agents from undertaking any work pertaining to construction of new service road on Chennai - Trichy NH - 38 from 294.657 km to 295.725 km in Siruganur Village, and revoke any no objection certificates issued in favour of the fourth respondent, by considering the representation dated NIL.09.2025. 2/5

2.The negative prayer sought for in this writ petition is absolutely misconceived. The petitioner is attempting to obstruct the public welfare schemes for laying service road. It is for the authorities to take a decision for formation of road and to provide infrastructure facilities. If at all any statutory violations committed, then alone the cause would arise. Therefore, the petitioner has not established a semblance of the legal right for the purpose of considering the relief as such sought for in the writ petition.

3. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

[S.M.S., J.] [G.A.M., J.] 13.06.2025 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No NCC:Yes/No LR 3/5

To

1. The District Collector, Tiruchirappalli District.

2. The District Revenue Officer, Tiruchirappalli District.

4/5

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

and G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.

LR 13.06.2025 5/5