Iyappan Thanganadar v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.08.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN and W.M.P.(MD) No.16314 of 2025 Iyappan Thanganadar ... Petitioner Vs

1. The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, Collectorate, Nagercoil - 629001.

2. The Additional Director (Town Panchayat), Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil - 629001.

3. The President, Puthalam Second Grade Town Panchayat, Puthalam, Kanyakumari District - 629602.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents more particularly the third respondent/Executive Officer, Puthalam Second-Grade Town Panchayat to 1/6

consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation, dated 23.07.2025 by passing an order within a period to be fixed by this Court and consequently, issue a fresh tender notification by following the due process of law. For petitioner : Mr. S.Ananth For respondents : Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman Government Advocate for R1 & R2 M/s.P.B.Ahamed Yashmin Parvin Government Advocate for R3 *****

ORDER

This Writ Petition is disposed of at the time of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Government Advocate for the third respondent and after dispensing with the notice on the fourth respondent, as no adverse orders are proposed to be passed against the fourth respondent.

2. This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to direct the respondents, more particularly, the third respondent/Executive Officer, Puthalam Second Grade Town Panchayat to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation, dated 23.07.2025 and consequently, issue a fresh tender notification by following the due process of law.

2/6

3. The specific case of the petitioner is that no tender was floated by the respondents in connection with the works for the Panchayat and that without the petitioner participating in the tender proceedings, it has been made as if the petitioner had participated in the tender and had offered a bid.

4. It is submitted that for the plumping works, estimated for a sum of Rs.9,60,000/-, mentioned in Serial No.9 of the Board proceedings of the General Body Meeting, dated 20.06.2025, the petitioner's name has been included as if the petitioner and one Ragavan have participated in the tender floated by the respondents 3 and 4 and that the work has been awarded to the said Ragavan.

5. It is further submitted that the said Ragavan is a practising Advocate in Nagercoil and similarly, several other works have also been awarded to the said Ragavan.

6. It is further submitted that the entire awarding of the contract is vitiated, as work order is being allotted arbitrarily to the different persons based on the names registered with Puthalam Second Grade Town Panchayat without 3/6

following the procedure for floating tender in accordance with law under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 and Rules made thereunder.

7. On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate for the third respondent submits that the work was allotted to the petitioner, after the petitioner has participated in the tender floated by the respondents and that the petitioner has been creating nuisance at the office of the fourth respondent and has been verbally abusing the women officers of the fourth respondent and that a decision has been taken and also a resolution has been passed to cancel the work order issued to the petitioner in an resolution passed on 31.07.2025 vide resolution No. 621/2025.

8. It is submitted that there is also a proposal to cancel the petitioner's contract licence in view of the nuisance created by the petitioner.

9. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2 and the 4/6

learned Government Advocate for the third respondent, I am of the view that there can be a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to look into the complaint of the petitioner, dated 23.07.2025 regarding the alleged awarding of contract without following procedure under the Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tender Act, 1998.

10. Independently, it is also open to the petitioner to move an appropriate application before the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu, in case the said Ragavan, practising Advocate is found to have participated in the tender floated by the respondents 3 and 4.

11. It is also open for the petitioner to approach the Vigilance Department, in case any other violations are noticed by the petitioner.

12. This Writ Petition is dismissed, with the above liberty. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions is closed. Index : Yes / No 05.08.2025 Internet : Yes / No apd 5/6

C.SARAVANAN, J.

apd To

1. The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, Collectorate, Nagercoil - 629001.

2. The Additional Director (Town Panchayat), Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil - 629001.

05.08.2025 6/6