M.Thiagarajan v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 26.02.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN M.Thiagarajan ... Petitioner -vs1. The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

2. The Project Director, District Rural Development Authority, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

3. Macheshwaran ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to take action against the 3rd respondent for the poor laying of the road between Thirupuvanam Narikudi Road to Kalvimadai and Kattanur Irunchirai Road to Seenianthal at Virudhunagar District and take steps to lay fresh Thar Road between Thirupuvanam Narikudi Road to Kalvimadai and Kattanur Irunchirai Road to Seenianthal at Virudhunagar District based on the petitioner's representation dated 30.04.2018.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Selvan For R1 & R2 : Mr.T.Amjadkhan, Government Advocate For R3 : No appearance

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE] Heard Mr.T.Selvan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.T.Amjadkhan, learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2. There is no appearance for the 3rd respondent. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that action needs to be taken against the 3rd respondent/Contractor for poor laying of the road between Thirupuvanam Narikudi Road to Kalvimadai and Kattanur Irunchirai Road to Seenianthal at Virudhunagar District. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the 3rd respondent did not properly lay the road. He further submits that the contract was given to the 3rd respondent in the year 2017.

3.

According to the learned Government Advocate, contract was given to the 3rd respondent in the year 2015 and subsequently the same was handed over to the Highways' Department and the Highways' Department has laid a

new road. As per the clauses in the agreement, the respondents 1 and 2 have taken action.

4.

Certainly, if the 3rd respondent has faulted in his work, the respondents 1 and 2 are empowered to take action against him. 5.

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. [S.V.G., C.J.] [G.I., J.] 26.02.2024 Index :

Yes / No :

Yes / No bala To:

1. The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

2. The Project Director, District Rural Development Authority, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE and G.ILANGOVAN , J.

bala 26.02.2024