Judgment · High Court

1BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 08.11.2011CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRUW.P.(MD)No.299 of 2011 Kandasamy: Petitioner vs.

The District Collector, Pudukkottai District.

The Tahsildar, Iluppoor Taluk, Pudukkottai District.: RespondentsPRAYER:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner'srepresentation dated 26.07.2010.For Petitioner : Mr.N.BalakrishnanFor Respondents : Mr.M.Govindan Special Government Pleader ******ORDER*******The petitioner is a resident of Puravippannai, Manamettupatti, Meppoothakudi Post, Iluppoor Taluk, Pudukkottai District. In this WritPetition, he has sought for a direction to the respondents, more particularly to the second respondent, the Tahsildar, Iluppoor Taluk, Pudukkottai District, to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner'srepresentation dated 26.07.2010.2. In the said representation, a copy of which found enclosed in page No.10 of the typed-set of papers, the petitioner stated that heis a permanent resident of the said village and there is a Oorani called"Kumarasamy Oorani", which is a tank situated in Survey No.201 and the petitioner is maintaining and enjoying the possession of the said tank at his own expenses. The said tank is meant for irrigation for the lands owned by him and the catchment area from which water is coming from Oorani is fully grown with bushes and Velikaruvai trees and unless those obstacles are removed, the free passage of water so as to fill up the tank will be jeopardized and he has sought for permission to remove the wild growth bushes including Velikaruvai trees. When the Tahsildar did not take action, he has also given a representation to the first respondent, the District Collector and thereafter, he has filed the present Writ Petition for the reliefs stated earlier. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

When the Writ Petition came up on 10.01.2011, this Courtordered notice to the respondents. On notice from this Court, the second respondent has filed a counter-affidavit dated 07.02.2011. In thecounter-affidavit, in paragraph Nos.5 and 7, it was averred as follows: "5............................ The petitioner was not granted permission to cut the trees at any point of time and also the petitioner is not at all maintaining the said Ooraniat any point of time. The writ petitioner filed this writ petition with an intention to encroach on the said Oorani. ThisHon'ble Court also passed orders in several cases to remove the encroachment made in the water body..........."7. I submit that the petitioner furnished an application on 22.12.2009 to grant permission to cut the trees which is standing in the said Kumarasamy Oorani. On perusal of the application the petitioner was informed to get a resolution from the Village Panchayat since the said Kumarasamy Ooranicomes under the purview of the Village Panchayat and the same is maintaining by the Village Panchayat by letter dated13.04.2010.