Madras High CourtWP(MD)/19103/2024dismissed

C.Karuppusamy v. The Tahsildar

2024-08-28Honourable Mr Justice N. Sathish Kumar4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date : 28/08/2024

CORAM

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice N.SATHISH KUMAR C.Karuppusamy ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Tahsildar, Ottanchathiram Taluk Office, Dindigul District..

2. The Panchayat President,, Poosaripatti Panchayat, Ottanchathiram Taluk, Dindigul District..

3. The Village Administrative Officer, Poosaripatti Panchayat, Ottanchathiram Taluk, Dindigul District..

4. Karuppasamy .A, S/o.Ayeappa Gounder, Poosaripatti Panchayat, Ottanchathiram Taluk, Dindigul District..

... Respondents 1/4

PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the petitioners representation dated 18.07.2024 and not to grant permission to the 4th respondent by using cracking the land for digging well in Survey No. 148/9 nearby the petitioner's house.

For Petitioner : M/s. T.Ramasamy, For Respondents : Mr.D.Gandhiraj for R1 and R3 Special Government Pleader Mr.D.Sadiq Raja for R2 Additional Government Pleader Mr.C.Abul Kalam Azad for R4

ORDER

It is the case of the petitioner that the 4th respondent digging a Well by using dangerous explosives without getting any permission from the respondent authorities. Hence, seeks a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.07.2024 and not to grant permission to the 4th respondent by using cracking the land for digging well in Survey No. 148/9 nearby the petitioner's house.

2. The learned Special Government Pleader, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner's house is not even closely situated in the place 2/4

where the Well is sought to be dug by the 4th respondent and no explosives are used. In order to substantiate his contention, the report of the Tahsildar has also been placed before this Court to the effect that permission has been obtained to dig the Well.

3. The learned counsel for the 4th respondent would submit that explosives are not used and photographs have also been placed to show the distance between the petitioner's place and the area where the Well is dug. It is contended that without any substance, for the sake of making some allegation, the writ petition has been filed.

4. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. 28.08.2024 RR TO

1. The Tahsildar, Ottanchathiram Taluk Office,Dindigul District..

2. The Village Administrative Officer, Poosaripatti Panchayat, Ottanchathiram Taluk,Dindigul District..

3/4

N.SATHISH KUMAR,J RR

ORDER

IN WP(MD) No.19103 of 2024 Date : 28/08/2024 4/4