P VENGUDUSAMY Vs. SUB COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has sought for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records relating to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in her proceedings in Pa.Mu.38/2016/A2, dated 03.03.2016, quash the same and consequently for a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action against the respondents 4 and 5 herein for ensuring the petitioner to get water from Parambikulam Main Canal, Thondamuthur Branch Canal, Veeralpatti Distributary Sluice No.9 in Parambikulam - Aliyar Project through said sluice and pipelines for the petitioner's land situated in S. No.10, Veeralpatti Village, Pollachi Taluk, Coimbatore District.

(2.) The writ petitioner claims that, himself and his brothers by name Sivasamy and Late Kumarasamy own lands situate in S. No.10, Veeralpatti Village to an extent of 6.00 Acres which come under the Ayacut in Parambikulam - Aliyar Project. Petitioner's lands are irrigated by the water from Parambikulam Main Canal, Thondamuthur Branch Canal, Veeralpatti Distrubutary Sluice No.9 in Parambikulam - Aliyar Project through the said sluice. The said water is received through pipeline that has been laid down by the Central and State Government under the scheme of Command Area Development Programme of about 25 years back.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that the respondents 4 and 5, whose lands are before petitioner's lands, had allegedly damaged the pipelines in order to stop water flowing to petitioner's lands. As the respondents 4 and 5 were disturbing the smooth flow of water through Sluice No.9 to petitioner's land, the petitioner was constrained to file O.S. No.207 of 2006 on the file of District Munsif Court, Pollachi, which was decreed on 25.09.2014. As the respondents 4 and 5 have been frequently preventing the flow of water into the lands of the petitioner through pipeline, he had also made a representation to the second respondent. The second respondent, passed orders in Proceedings No.Na.Ka.17218/2015/Aa2 dated 28.10.2016 taking note of the fact that a suit has been filed by the petitioner and the same was decreed, which is under challenge before Subordinate Court and directed the petitioner to work out his remedy only before the civil court.