BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 04/12/2008
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA
W.P(MD)No.11123 of 2008
and
M.P(MD)No.1 of 2008
M.Rajasekarapandian . . . Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Secretary,
Ministry of Surface Transport and
Highways,
New Delhi.
2.The Divisional Engineer,
Tamil Nadu Road Sector Project-04,
31, New Salt Colony,
Tuticorin.
3.The District Collector,
Ramanathapuram District,
Ramanathapuram. . . . Respondents
PRAYER
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying to issue a writ of mandamus, to direct the respondents to construct two
culverts at 561-200 KM and 561-580 KM in Ramanathapuram - Sayalkudi Road in
pursuance of the petitioner's representation dated 10.11.2008.
!For Petitioner ... Mr.AR.Jeyaruthran
^For RR1 and 2 ... Mr.Arul Vadivel alias Sekar
Assistant Solicitor General
of India
For Respondent ... Mr.D.Sasikumar
No.3 Government Advocate
* * * *
:ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to construct
two culverts at 561-200 KM and 561-580 KM in Ramanathapuram – Sayalkudi Road in
pursuance of the petitioner’s representation dated 10.11.2008.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Arul Vadivel @ Sekar,
learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, who took notice on behalf of the
respondents 1 and 2 and also Mr.D.Sasikumar, learned Government Advocate, who
took notice on behalf of the respondent No.3.
3. The grievance of the petitioner as aired by the learned counsel for the
petitioner placing reliance on the averments in the affidavit accompanying the
writ petition, is to the effect that the representation of the petitioner dated
10.11.2008 to the respondents 1 and 2 evoked no positive response. Hence, this
writ petition.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the process
of widening the road, two culverts were removed and thereby putting the
petitioner in dearth of irrigation water; the representation dated 10.11.2008 to
the respondents 1 and 2 evoked no positive response.
5. The learned Assistant Solicitor General of India would submit that the
representation would be considered on merits.
6. Hence, in these circumstances, the following direction is issued:
The second respondent shall do well to see that he considers the
representation of the petitioner dated 10.11.2008 on merits after giving due
opportunity of being heard to the petitioner within a period of fifteen days
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
smn
To
1.The Secretary,
Ministry of Surface Transport and
Highways,
New Delhi.
2.The Divisional Engineer,
Tamil Nadu Road Sector Project-04,
31, New Salt Colony,
Tuticorin.
3.The District Collector,
Ramanathapuram District,
Ramanathapuram.