1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.09.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR Writ Petition (MD)No.7582 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 Arumugam, S/o.Nallaiya .. Petitioner .vs. 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, rep.by its Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Fort St.George, Chennai. 2.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 3.The Block Development Officer, Thiruppathur Panchayat Union, Thiruppathur Taluk, Sivagangai District. 4.The President, Keezha Sevalpatti Panchayat, Keezha Sevalpatti, Thiruppthur Taluk, Sivagangai District. 5.Sri Meenakshi Sundareswarar Sivan Kovil Trust, rep.by its Managing Trustee, Keezha Sevalpatti, Thiruppthur Taluk, Sivagangai District. 6.The Executive Officer, Thiruppathur Panchayat Union, Thiruppathur, Sivagangai District. .. Respondents (R-6 impleaded as per order dated 11.08.2011 made in MP(MD)No.2 of 2011) Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of mandamus directing the 3rd and 4th respondents to restore water connection to the petitioner's house immediately in the light of his representation, dated 16.06.2011, within a time frame. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Meltiue For Respondents : Mr.M.Govindan, 1 & 2 Spl.Govt.Pleader. For Respondents : M.Alagu Thevar 3 & 4 For Respondent-5 : Mr.S.Sathish Kumar O R D E R The petitioner, in this case, seeks a direction to the respondents to restore water connection for his residential house. 2.Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 3.The Panchayat President has not granted relief to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner should get 'no objection' from the 5th respondent, as the property through which the water pipeline runs belongs to the 5th respondent. The parties were called upon to work out an amicable solution and accordingly the parties appeared before this Court. However, nothing fruitful turned out from the suggestion given by the Court. Therefore, considering the earlier orders that have already been passed in the writ petition, in the writ appeal and in the contempt petition, the court is of the view that the Block Development Officer concerned, the respondent No.3 herein, should be directed to look into the matter for the purpose of granting water supply to the petitioner. 4.Accordingly, the 3rd respondent is directed to look into the matter for the purpose of granting water supply to the petitioner, if the water pipeline already laid for giving water supply to other dwellers runs through the property of the 5th respondent. The authorities shall ensure that there is no discrimination between one or the other residents of the village, subject to the petitioner making all requisite payments, as required under law. The 3rd respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, after hearing objections, if any, from the respondent Nos.4 and 5. 5.The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. No costs. Connected M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 is closed. SD/- Assistant Registrar (AE) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(C.S) To 1.The Secretary to Government, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Fot St.George, Chenni. 2.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 3.The Block Development Officer, Thiruppathur Panchayat Union, Thiruppathur Taluk, Sivagangai District. 4.The President, Keezha Sevalpatti Panchayat, Keezha Sevalpatti, Thiruppthur Taluk, Sivagangai District. 5.Sri Meenakshi Sundareswarar Sivan Kovil Trust, rep.by its Managing Trustee, Keezha Sevalpatti, Thiruppthur Taluk, Sivagangai District. 6.The Executive Officer, Thiruppathur Panchayat Union, Thiruppathur, Sivagangai District. +1. CC to the Special Government Pleader, SR.No. 348670 gb Order in W.P(MD)No.7582/2011 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 Date:30.09.2011 TR :21.10.2011: 3p/8c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/