Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Cancellation of Water Draw Permission. Order Cancelling Permission Was Passed Pursuant to Interim Order in Pending Writ Petitions, No Infirmity Found.

High Court: Madras High Court
  • 59
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, M. Pitchaikani, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, challenging the order of the second respondent, the Superintending Engineer, P.W.D., W.R.O., Periyar-Vaigai Basin Division, Madurai, dated 28.09.2021. The impugned order cancelled the permission granted to the petitioner to draw water through a pipeline for non-irrigation lands. The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the order as arbitrary. The court observed that the impugned order was passed in pursuance of an interim order passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.8957, 8967 and 8973 of 2020, which were still pending. In view of this, the court found no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the second respondent. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as devoid of merits, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed. No order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Writ Law - Certiorari - Cancellation of Permission - The petitioner challenged the order of the second respondent cancelling permission to draw water through pipeline for non-irrigation lands. The court held that the order was passed pursuant to an interim order in pending writ petitions and found no infirmity or illegality. The writ petition was dismissed as devoid of merits. (Paras 3-4)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the order cancelling permission to draw water through pipeline for non-irrigation lands is arbitrary and illegal.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petition was dismissed as devoid of merits. No order as to costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

Law Points

  • Writ of Certiorari
  • Interim order
  • Pending writ petition
  • No infirmity
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 565

W.P(MD)No.18765 of 2021 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.15566 and 15571 of 2021

2025-01-02

G.K. Ilanthiraiyan

2025:MHC:97

For Petitioner: Mr. R. Suriyanarayanan; For RR 1 to 4: Mr. S. Shanmugavel, Addl. Govt Pleader; For RR5 and 6: Mr. R. Deenadhayalan

M. Pitchaikani

1. The Chief Engineer, P.W.D., W.R.O., Madurai Zone, Madurai-2; 2. The Superintending Engineer, P.W.D., W.R.O., Periyar-Vaigai Basin Division, Madurai-2; 3. The Executive Engineer, P.W.D., W.R.O., Periya-Vaigai Basin Division, Madurai-2; 4. The Assistant Engineer, P.W.D., W.R.O., Irrigation Division, Uthamapalayam, Theni District; 5. The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, TNEB Complex, NRT Nagar, Theni District; 6. The Assistant Electrical Engineer, TNEB, Chinnamannur, Theni District; 7. Vijayarajan

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging cancellation of permission to draw water through pipeline for non-irrigation lands.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the second respondent dated 28.09.2021 cancelling permission to draw water through pipeline.

Filing Reason

The petitioner's permission to draw water through pipeline for non-irrigation lands was cancelled by the second respondent's order dated 28.09.2021.

Previous Decisions

The impugned order was passed pursuant to an interim order passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.8957, 8967 and 8973 of 2020, which are still pending.

Issues

Whether the order cancelling permission to draw water through pipeline for non-irrigation lands is arbitrary and illegal.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the order cancelling permission was arbitrary. Respondents submitted that the order was passed pursuant to an interim order in pending writ petitions.

Ratio Decidendi

The order cancelling permission was passed pursuant to an interim order in pending writ petitions; hence, there was no infirmity or illegality in the order.

Judgment Excerpts

It is seen that the said order has been passed in pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.8957, 8967 and 8973 of 2020. In view of the above, there is no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the second respondent.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed W.P(MD)No.18765 of 2021 challenging the order of the second respondent dated 28.09.2021. The court heard the matter and dismissed the petition on 02.01.2025.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Cancellation of Water Draw Permission. Order Cancelling Permission Was Passed Pursuant to Interim Order in Pending Writ Petitions, No Infirmity Found.
Related Judgement
High Court High Court Dismisses Appeal for Enhancement of Land Acquisition Compensation Due to Inordinate Delay of 3860 Days. Condonation of delay refused as explanation of mother's illness and death held insufficient to justify delay of over 10 years.