Jeyaraman, S/O.Venkatachalam v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.04.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN W.P.(MD)No.6498 of 2017 and W.M.P(MD)No.5090 of 2017 Jeyaraman ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Dindigul District.

2.The Executive Officer, Sriramapuram Town Panchayat, Dindigul District.

...Respondents

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 24.03.2017 made in Na.Ka.No.205/2017 passed by the second respondent and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Venkatesh For Respondents : Mr.D.Muruganantham Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned order dated 24.03.2017 made in Na.Ka.No.205/2017 passed by the second respondent.

2.The case of the petitioner is that his wife owns land in Survey No.664/4 to an extent of 0.92.5 Ares situated at Kodalvavi village, Dindigul West Taluk. In the said land, the petitioner dug a bore-well for 500 feet and obtained electricity service connection in S.C.No.271-009-276 under tariff V for commercial purpose.

3.According to the petitioner, the entire neighbourhood has been suffering from severe water shortage and the petitioner has been sourcing water from the bore-wells and catering to the needs of the people in the neighbourhood for minimum costs for agricultural purpose. According to the petitioner, there is no embargo for drilling water from the bore-well and supplying the same to the villagers.

4.While matter stood thus, the second respondent, by the impugned proceedings dated 24.03.2017, directed the petitioner to stop the drawing water from the bore-wells within 24 hours and failing which, the electricity connection given to him could be disconnected. The said proceedings is under challenge before this Court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 6.When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would submit his explanation to the second respondent in response to the impugned proceedings and the same may be considered and disposed of within a reasonable time.

7.In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to submit his explanation to the second respondent by way of a detailed representation, within a period of one week from today. On receipt of such representation, the second respondent shall consider the same and pass order on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks thereafter. The decision taken by the second respondent shall be communicated to the petitioner. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

SD ASST REGISTRAR TRUE COPY SUB ASST REGISTRAR skn To 1.The District Collector, Dindigul District. 2.The Executive Officer, Sriramapuram Town Panchayat, Dindigul District. 1CC TO MR. D. VENKATESH, ADVOCATE SR: 52537 AM SKN RSK SAR 4 19/4/2017 2P 4C W.P.(MD)No.6498 of 2017 and W.M.P(MD)No.5090 of 2017 18.04.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/