THIRUSULI MUTHAIAH Vs. VENKATAPATHI NAYAKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both the sides. From the facts and figures as well as from the submissions made on both sides, what transpires is that the plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.312 of 2007 seeking the following reliefs: "TAMIL " The defendant resisted the suit. An I.A. in I.A.No.787 of 2011 for getting impleaded a new party was filed by the plaintiff, which was simply dismissed; as against which the revision has been focussed.

(2.) ON a mere running of the eye over the order as well as the I.A., would reveal that the proposed parties, viz. 1)The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, 76, Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai-600032; 2)The District Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, 6/26, Sangai Street, Madurai Road, Virudhunagar and The Deputy Chief Environmental Engineer (General), Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, 6/26, Sangai Street, Madurai Road, Virudhunagar, are not the respondents in the I.A. Anybody who has to be added as a party should be put on notice. This basic factor was not complied with. Be that as it may, here the plaintiff wanted to implead the statutory authority. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that the said authority is inactive. If at all the plaintiff is aggrieved by the so-called inaction on the part of the statutory authority, he has to petition that authority and if the authority is not responding, then there are other safeguards under the Act. Accordingly it has to be approached. Therefore, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. No costs.

(3.) On hearing the pronouncement of the order, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner would make an extempore submission that liberty might be given to the plaintiff to approach the authority as per law and also to summon the official concerned for examining him before the Court. It is open for the plaintiff to take steps for summoning necessary witnesses, which shall be considered on merits by the Lower Court.