M. Renga Rathinam v. The Chief Engineer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.03.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI W.P(MD)No.27897 of 2024 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.23660 & 23661 of 2024 1.M.Renga Rathinam 2.Vasugi ... Petitioners Vs.
1.The Chief Engineer, Water Reservoir Division, (WRD), 2.The Superintendent Engineer, Water Reservoir Division (WRD), 3.The Executive Engineer, Cantonment, Tiruchirappalli-01.
1/6
4.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Sannadhi Street, Lalgudi 621 601, 5.The Assistant Engineer, Water Resource Department, River Basin Division, Lalgudi 621 601, 6.The Revenue Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Lalgudi-621 601, 7.The District Collector, Tiruchirappalli, Representing Government of Tamil Nadu, District Collectors Office, Tiruchirappalli-620001.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned notice dated 27.10.2024 of the 5th respondent, quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents from in anyway interfering with the possession and enjoyment of suit properties by the petitioners. 2/6
For Petitioners :Mr.R.A.Mohanram For Respondents :Mr.K.Balasubramani Special Government Pleader for R1 to R7
ORDER
Heard both sides.
2. The petitioners were permitted way back in the year 1978 to put up a stone bridge so that they can access their agricultural lands. The stone bridge has been erected at a height of 7 feet. When the authorities came to dismantle the same, the petitioner filed O.S.No.55 of 2023 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Lalgudi and obtained decree that the authorities should not dismantle the bridge except by due process of law. Thereafter, the impugned Form II notice was issued. Challenging the same, this writ petition came to be filed.
3. We are of the view that the petitioners have not done anything on their own. The proceedings whereby permission has been granted has been enclosed in the typed set of papers. The petitioners have been enjoying the access facility for the last 47 years. The petitioners do not claim any right as 3/6
such. The only concern expressed in the counter affidavit is that when the water level raises to the level of the stone bridge, it would be risky for the petitioners to cross the same. So long as the free flow of water has not been impeded, the subject bridge need not be dismantled. We make it clear that the petitioners have not been conferred any right as such. The petitioners are enjoying this access facility by the sufferance of the respondents. As of now, no case has been made out to interfere with the petitioners' access right. The impugned notice is set aside. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. [G.R.S., J.] [B.P., J.] 04.03.2025 NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No rmi To 1.The Chief Engineer, Water Reservoir Division, (WRD), 4/6
2.The Superintendent Engineer, Water Reservoir Division (WRD), 3.The Executive Engineer, Cantonment, Tiruchirappalli-01.
4.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Sannadhi Street, Lalgudi 621 601, 5.The Assistant Engineer, Water Resource Department, River Basin Division, Lalgudi 621 601, 6.The Revenue Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Lalgudi-621 601, 7.The District Collector, Tiruchirappalli, Representing Government of Tamil Nadu, District Collectors Office, Tiruchirappalli-620001.
5/6
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J and B.PUGALENDHI, J.
rmi W.P(MD)No.27897 of 2024 04.03.2025 6/6