LAWS(MAD)-2013-1-213

K.P.ELAYAPPAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

Decided On January 23, 2013
K.P.Elayappan Appellant
V/S
STATE OF TAMIL NADU Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.V.Lakshminarayanan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.R.Vijayakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 6 and Mr.A.S.Thambuswamy, learned counsel for the seventh respondent.

(2.) THE prayer in the Writ Petition is to direct the respondents 1 to 6 to take appropriate action against the seventh respondent for attempting to dislocate the natural course of water at Odai in R.S.No.357/1, Kagam Village, Erode Taluk and District and consequently direct the respondents to restore the Odai (water channel) as it exists in R.S.No.357/1 at Kagam Village, Erode Taluk and District.

(3.) THE seventh respondent has filed a counter affidavit, inter-alia stating that it is wrong to state that she is trying to lay cart track in poramboke in R.S.No.357/1 with a view to wreak vengeance on the petitioner. On the contrary, the existing cart track was damaged to a length of 300 meters. The public, who are using the same cart track, gave a petition to the seventh respondent to re-lay the road so that they can use the same without any difficulty. On getting permission from the third respondent to re-lay the road, the Council resolved to execute the work. Tenders were called for and the lowest tender of Rs.1 lakh was given by one Sengottayan, which was accepted. He has completed the preliminary work only. It is not correct to state that the Odai is on the Southern side of the cart track in all the Revenue Records. This allegation is falsified by the existence of wall constructed from and out of Member of Parliament Development Fund. The cart track is re-laid without affecting the Odai on its Southern side. The other land owners have given a portion of their lands for laying the road for convenient use of public. The seventh respondent has not changed or diverted or reduced the width of the Odai. On the other hand, the Odai was deepened by one feet by removing the sand and stilt. Therefore, the seventh respondent prayed for dismissal of the Writ Petition.