P KUMARASAMY Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR ERODE DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.A.Suresh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.V.M.Velumani, learned Spl.G.P. appearing for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner has come before this Court with a prayer to direct the respondents to lay or form the drainage canal little bit away from the petitioner's agricultural lands and Wells situated in the survey numbers 237/4, 239/1, 239/2 in a total extent of 2 acres in punjai Kolanalli Village, Erode District.

(3.) ON the above background of pleadings, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted showing the photographs that close to the Wells, the canal has been proposed to be widened and therefore, there is likelihood of damage to the Wells and the water may be polluted. ON the other hand, learned Spl.G.P. also produced photographs in support of the stand of the respondents and showed that it is the canal which is already in existence and now widening and deepening work is carried on after getting sanction from the MLA constituency improvement fund and the improvement has been carried on in order to benefit the public at large and the Wells of the petitioners are abutting the road and on the other side only, the drainage canal is being proceeded with and it is not in any way hindrance to the petitioner or even to pollute the water. Therefore, the petitioner cannot come before this Court for the above relief. However, learned Spl.G.P. pointed out paragraph 4 of the additional counter filed by the third respondent, which states as follows: