K.Ganesan v. The Principal Secretary

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.09.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.THARANI and W.M.P.(MD) No.16458 of 2019 K.Ganesan ... Petitioner -vs1.The Principal Secretary Rural Development & Panchayat Secretariat Chennai 2.The Director Rural Development & Panchayat Raj Panagal Maligai Saidapet Chennai 3.The District Collector Ramanathapuram District Ramanathapuram 4.The Joint Director / Project Officer District Rural Development Agency Office of the District Collector Ramanathapuram District 5.The Executie Engineer District Rural Development Agency Office of the District Collector Ramanathapuram 6.The Block Development Officer Village Panchayat Paramakudi Post Ramanathapuram District 1/4

7.The Block Development Officer Taluk Panchayat Paramakudi Panchayat Union Ramanathapuram District 8.Natarajan 9.Selvaraj 10.Meenakshi Sundaram 11.Kathiravan 12.Murugan ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of mandamus by directing the respondent Nos.1 to 7 to cancel the allotment of works being carried by the respondent Nos.8 to 12 in the name of "Kudimaramathu" at Keelaparuthiyur Village, Serumankulam Minor Irrigation Tank, Keelaparuthiyur Pillayaraendhal Oorani and Keelaparuthiyur Pulavarvelankudi Village Oorani and consequently direct the respondent Nos.1 to 7 to entrust the same to the competent agency as enshrined in G.O.(Ms) No.96, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (CGS.1) Department dated 26.07.2019 and further direct them to ensure that those works are being completed within a time bound manner as stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Anand For Respondents :

Mr.A.Muthukaruppan Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R5 Mr.V.Anand Government Advocate for R6 & R7

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.] Heard Mr.R.Anand, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, Mr.A.Muthukaruppan, learned Additional Government Pleader, who accepts notice for the respondents 1 to 5 and Mr.V.Anand, learned Government Advocate, who accepts notice for the respondents 6 and 7.

2. In view of the order we propose to pass in this writ petition, notice to the respondents 8 to 12 is dispensed with.

3. With the consent of both sides, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2/4

4. By this writ petition designed as public interest litigation, the writ petitioner seeks to cancel the work allotted to the respondents 8 to 12 for the purpose of carrying out "Kudimaramathu" at Keelaparuthiyur Village, Serumankulam Minor Irrigation Tank, Keelaparuthiyur Pillayaraendhal Oorani and Keelaparuthiyur Pulavarvelankudi Village Oorani.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner submitted that there are sufficient guidelines issued by the Government in the form of orders, where desilting work and cleaning work should be entrusted to the local Ayakattudars and in violation of the same, certain third parties, namely, respondents 8 to 12, have been granted permission to carry out Kudimaramathu. The reason for entrusting the work to the local Ayakattudars is to ensure that the work is not only carried out in an efficient manner, but also to prevent any illegal transportation of sand etc. It appears to be precisely on the apprehension and fear of the writ petitioner, representations have been given.

6. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 5 submitted that the work has been entrusted and more than 60% of the work has already been completed.

7. In the light of the above, this Court is of the considered view that it this juncture, it would not be proper to cancel the allotment of work for being redone by the local Ayakattudars. However, if any work is not allotted, then the above aspect shall be considered and the work shall be allotted to the local Ayakattudars by following the appropriate guidelines framed by the Government. It is needless to state that the Authority should check as to whether there is any illegal transportation of sand from the irrigation lands.

8. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-III) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar To:

1.The Principal Secretary, Rural Development & Panchayat, Secretariat, Chennai.

3/4

2.The Director, Rural Development & Panchayat Raj, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai.

3.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

4.The Joint Director / Project Officer, District Rural Development Agency, Office of the District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.

5.The Executie Engineer, District Rural Development Agency, Office of the District Collector, Ramanathapuram.

6.The Block Development Officer, Village Panchayat, Paramakudi Post, Ramanathapuram District.

7.The Block Development Officer, Taluk Panchayat, Paramakudi Panchayat Union, Ramanathapuram District.

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-87551[F] dated 18/09/2019 ) and W.M.P.(MD) No.16458 of 2019 17.09.2019 KRK MS/03.10.2019/4P.8C 4/4