M. PONNUPANDIAN Vs. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition is filed praying this Court for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the impugned order in Pa.Mu(A3) 3814/2014, dated 18.06.2014 on the file of the second respondent and to quash the same.

(2.) ACCORDING to the Writ Petitioner, the impugned order is wrong only on the basis that there is already a dispute between two villages regarding the taking of water from the Oorani. Earlier a Writ Petition in W.P. No.10374 of 2005 was filed for survey the boundaries between the villages and the same has been dismissed for default on 17.10.2006. In fact, Tamarind trees is falling within the jurisdiction of the Petitioner panchayat. Therefore the 5th respondent villagers have developed a grudge upon them. The fifth respondent villagers have filed another Writ Petition in W.P. No.18495 of 2013 for a direction forbearing the Government from granting permission to the Petitioner's Panchayat to lay a road between Kokkarankottai and Uchinatham. Therefore according to the Writ Petitioner, fifth respondent cannot have any grievance over laying of road and no such representation was given and that the road was laid. According to him, the said Oorani situated in the northern side of the Petitioner's village and water is used only for drinking and cooking purpose and the water is not used for any other purpose. Similarly, the 5th respondent Village had two ooranies for their drinking purpose. The present order is against their rights and to discharge the rain water through the northern side of their village and importantly to break the wall on the northern side of the Petitioner's Oorani and to construct steps to fetch water from the northern side. It is further submitted that the boundary was surveyed earlier in the presence of all the officials and persons concerned and that they do not have any objection regarding the discharge of rain water in the manner they like. However the breaking of the wall protecting the oorani in the northern side is completely unnecessary. Therefore they challenge the order impugned herein.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the fifth respondent would bring to the notice of this Court even in the impugned order the entire villagers were present along with Village Panchayat President. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the Panchayat President and he was aware of the order passed. They have been given due representation regarding the same and the order is a consent order and that clause(3) of the order, namely: