IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 09.11.2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. KIRUBAKARAN W.P.No.12135 of 2003 R.Tamaraikani .. Petitioner Vs. 1. State of Tamil Nadu rep.by Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2. The Commissioner of Municipal Administration,Chepauk, Chennai-600 005. 3. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005. 4. The District Collector, Virudhu Nagar District, Virudhunagar. 5. The Commissioner, Srivilliputtur Municipality, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District. 6. T. Sadaipandi President, Kansapuram Panchayat Watrap Panchayat Union, Srivilliputhur Taluk, Virudhunagar district. .. Respondents (R6 impleaded as per order of the Court dated 28.1.2004 in WPMP 30610 of 2003) The Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to implement G.O.No.67 dated 23.03.2001 issued by the first respondent herein within a stipulated period. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Petitioner : Mr.K. Govi Ganeshan For Respondents: Mr.P. Gurunathan, Government Advocate for R1,R2 & R4 Mrs.Sudharana Sundar for R3 Mr.P.Srinivas for R5 ORDER Mr.R. Thamaraikani, Chairman of Srivilliputtur Municipality filed the above writ petition for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to implement G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 23.03.2001 issued by the first respondent within the stipulated period. 2. During pendency of the writ petition, Mr.R.Thamaraikani, the petitioner herein passed away. The learned Counsel for the petitioner represented that the present Chairman, Srivilliputtur is not interested in the writ petition and sought for withdrawal of the writ petition. However, this court declined to grant permission to withdraw the writ petition observing that as the interest of Srivilliputtur people are involved, the matter cannot be dismissed as withdrawn as stated by the counsel of the petitioner. This Court cannot act and decide as per the wishes of the petitioner. Hence, this court directed the 5th respondent to file an affidavit to the effect what was the action taken regarding the subject matter of the writ petition. 3. Once the matter is brought to the court and the matter is regarding the interest of the Srivilliputtur people, the writ petition cannot be simply withdrawn and it should be decided on merits and there should be an adjudication with regard to the interest of the people. 4. The Commissioner, Srivilliputtur Municipality, the 5th respondent is present before this Court and has also filed an affidavit stating that the water supply scheme for Srivilliputtur as per G.O.Ms.67 dated 23.03.2001 could not be implemented due to opposition from the nearby villages. In paragraph 5 of the affidavit, it is stated that an alternative scheme was formulated known as "Thamiraparani river at Mukkadal village". The said scheme is formed to provide water supply to the Srivilliputhur town and also several Panchayat and Town Panchayats. The said proposal for the modified scheme was approved by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.49,MA and WS Department dated 15.06.2006. 5. The Commissioner submitted that the scheme is now proceeding and the work is almost completed by 70% and it would be https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ completed by the end of March 2010. 6. The scheme has been given the name "Vasudevannallur water supply improvement scheme" and is to give benefit to various towns at Vasudevanallur and 78 rural habitations in Tirunelveli District and other wayside villages in Virudhanagar district. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner after perusing the affidavit stated that the alternative scheme namely "Vasudevannallur Water Supply Improvement scheme" is better scheme than the original scheme sought to be introduced in G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 23.03.2001. 8. In paragraph 6 of the affidavit filed by the 5th respondent the cost of the scheme was Rs.29.49 crores and the same was sanctioned by the Government as a better scheme for being implemented by the Government in the interest of large number of people. Thus the G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 23.03.2001 was revoked and G.O.Ms.No.49 dated 15.06.2006 was passed. 9. Taking into consideration of the subsequent developments, a direction is given to the authorities to implement the scheme at the earliest. 10. With the above said direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ssj To 1. The Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2. The Commissioner of Municipal Administration,Chepauk, Chennai-600 005. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005. 4. The District Collector, Virudhu Nagar District, Virudhunagar. 5. The Commissioner, Srivilliputtur Municipality, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District. +1cc to Mr.K.Goviganesan. Advocate Sr 60234 +1cc to Mr.Sufhstdhsns Sunder,Advocate Sr 59652 +1cc to Mr.P.Srinivas, Advocate Sr 59703 MS(CO) km/1.2. W.P.No.12135 of 2003 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/