Madras High CourtWP(MD)/27560/2023disposed of

Muniyaraj M v. The Director

2026-01-29Honourable Mr Justice R.Vijayakumar5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR WP(MD) No.27560 of 2023 M.Muniyaraj ....Petitioner Vs 1.The Director Directorate of Rural Development and Panchayath Raj Department Panagal Building, Chennai 2.The District Collector Ramanathapuram District 3.The Assistant Project Director Direct Rural Development Department Ramanathapuram 4.The Block Development Officer Mandapam Panchayath Union Ramanathapuram District 5.The Panchayath Secretary Nochiyurani Panchayath Mandapam Panchayath Union Ramanathapuram ....Respondents Prayer:Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to 1/5

release the material cost for construction of New Ring Well as per work order in Na.Ka.R11/3315/2017 dated 30.01.2018 passed by the first respondent by considering the representation dated 02.06.2023. For Petitioner :Mr.B.Mahendrarajan For Respondents : M/s.D.Farjana Ghoushia Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to release the material cost for construction of New Ring Well as per work order dated 30.01.2018 passed by the first respondent by considering the representation dated 02.06.2023. 2.According to the learned counsel for the writ petitioner, the ring Well construction has been completed and the respondent officials have also released the labour cost. However, the material cost has not been released. Hence, he sent a representation on 02.06.2023. 3.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the fourth respondent has brought to the notice of the Court that the District Collector has cancelled the work order issued to the writ petitioner on 24.01.2019 on the ground that the petitioner's father has already been beneficiary of the said scheme and therefore, such a benefit cannot be extended again. However, the 2/5

said order has not been served to the writ petitioner. 4.In view of the above said facts, the respondents are directed to serve a copy of cancellation of the work order issued to the writ petitioner along with the reasons to enable him to challenge the same. 5.In fine, this writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 24.01.2019 passed by the second respondent, if he is so advised. No costs.

29.01.2026 Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No msa 3/5

To 1.The Director Directorate of Rural Development and Panchayath Raj Department Panagal Building, Chennai 2.The District Collector Ramanathapuram District 3.The Assistant Project Director Direct Rural Development Department Ramanathapuram 4.The Block Development Officer Mandapam Panchayath Union Ramanathapuram District 5.The Panchayath Secretary Nochiyurani Panchayath Mandapam Panchayath Union Ramanathapuram 6.The Section Officer V.R.Section Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai 4/5

R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.

msa WP(MD) No.27560 of 2023 29.01.2026 5/5