Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2022 DAILYLAW 4923 (MAD)

C.Prakasam v. The District Collector

WP/11086/2022 · 2026-06-17

M Dhandapani

Transfer Petitionbody2022

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

W.P.No.11086 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 17.06.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.No.11086 of 2022 And W.M.P.No.10681 of 2022 1 C.Prakasam 2 S.Periyasamy 3 P.Chinnusamy 4 S.Nanjappan 5 P.Chendrayan 6 V.Marimuthu 7 N.Chinnusamy ... Petitioners Vs. 1 The District Collector, Salem District, Salem. 2 The Block Development Officer, Sankari Panchayat Union, Sankari, Salem District. 3 The Pullagoundenpatti Agraharam Village Panchayat rep. by its President, Pullagoundenpatti Village, Sankari Taluk, Salem District. ... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11086 of 2022 issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned resolution No.379/21-22 dated 14.02.2022 passed by the third respondent, quash the same and consequently forbear the respondents from interfering with the right of the petitioners to draw water through the underground pipelines laid as per G.O. Ms.No.70 dated 02.03.2020 passed by the Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Secretariat, Chennai and NOC dated 24.09.2020 granted by the second respondent. For Petitioners : Ms.R.Renukadevi For Respondents : Mr.L.Gokulraj for R1, R2 Government Counsel R3 – No Appearance O R D E R The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the resolution No.379/21-22 dated 14.02.2022 passed by the third respondent, quash the same and consequently forbear the respondents from interfering with the right of the petitioners to draw water through the underground pipelines laid as per G.O. Ms.No.70 dated 02.03.2020 passed by the Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Secretariat, Chennai and NOC dated 24.09.2020 granted by the second respondent. 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11086 of 2022 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners filed this writ petition seeking to quash resolution No.379/21-22 dated 14.02.2022 passed by the third respondent and to consequently forbear the respondents from interfering with the right of the petitioners to draw water through the underground pipelines laid as per G.O. Ms.No.70 dated 02.03.2020, however, subsequently the petitioners filed W.P.No.953 of 2024 seeking direction to the respondents to provide necessary police protection to the petitioners to re-lay the pipelines in S.F. No. 71/2 of Pullagoundanpatti Agraharam Village, Sankari Taluk and to lay the pipelines in other survey numbers as indicated in the Lift Irrigation Scheme in compliance with G.O.Ms.No. 70 dated 02.03.2020 issued by the first respondent, NOCs and track rent permissions granted by the respondents 2 to 8 by considering the petitioners' representations dated 22.09.2023, 07.12.2023, 18.12.2023 and 21.12.2023 and this Court vide order dated 26.03.2025 allowed the said writ petition and directed the ninth respondent therein to provide adequate police protection to the petitioners while relaying the pipe line in the land comprised in S.F. No. 71/2 of Pullagoundanpatti Agraharam Village, Sankari Taluk, Salem District, in order to implement the government 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11086 of 2022 order in G.O.Ms.No.70 PWD dated 02.03.2020 and challenging the same one S.P.Thangaraju/ respondent no.20 in the said writ petition filed S.L.P.(C) No.9853 of 2025 and the said SLP was disposed of with the observation that ‘we are not inclined to interfere with the direction of providing police protection. However, we are informed that the very permission which has been granted to the original writ petitioners for the purpose of laying the pipeline is a subject matter of challenge. Let that challenge be looked into by the High Court in accordance with law at the earliest.’ Hence, this Court may close this writ petition. 3.Recording the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, this writ petition is closed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. 17.06.2026 pri Index: Yes/ No Speaking Order: Yes/ No NCC: Yes/ No 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11086 of 2022 To 1 The District Collector, Salem District, Salem. 2 The Block Development Officer, Sankari Panchayat Union, Sankari, Salem District. 3 The Pullagoundenpatti Agraharam Village Panchayat rep. by its President, Pullagoundenpatti Village, Sankari Taluk, Salem District. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11086 of 2022 M.DHANDAPANI,J. pri W.P.No.11086 of 2022 And W.M.P.No.10681 of 2022 17.06.2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis