1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.11.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.(MD)No.1948 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 M.Mohammed Jamal Ibrahim ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Director of Municipal Administration, Chepauk, Chennai. 2.The Regional Director of Municipal Administration, Annamaligai, Madurai-20. 3.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram. 4.The Executive Officer, Keelakarai Municipality, Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the resolution passed in No.344/1 dated 06.12.2010 and quash the same and consequently directing the 3rd respondent to execute the resolution passed in No.302/5 dated 28.10.2010. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Seeni Sulthan For Respondents : Mr.S.Srimathi for R4 R1 to R3 dismissed for default O R D E R The petitioner is an Ex-Ward Councillor of the 18th ward in Kelakkarai Municipality. In this Writ petition he has challenged a municipal resolution dated 06.12.2010 passed in an emergency meeting held on 06.12.2010. By the said resolution, a contract work of Rs.110.15 lakhs was awarded to a contractor for carrying out thar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 road in the municipal limits. 2.It is seen from the resolution No.344/1 for the work to be done in item Nos.1 and 2 which is estimated to the cost of Rs.53.50 lakhs, the ward councillor Nos.17 and 18 have raised objections and other members including the President was in favour of the tender and the tender was approved. The petitioner being the Councillor in ward No.18, who raised objections, has filed the present Writ petition. 3.Notice of motion was ordered on 21.02.2011. Pending the notice of motion, no interim order was granted. 4.It is the case of the petitioner that there was lot of irregularities in the estimate and the award of contract and the resolution should not be carried out in public interest. 5.In any event, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ petition, especially when under Section 36 of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, the petitioner has got remedy by way of petitioning the State Government, which has got power to analyse any resolution passed by the Municipality, if it is against public interest. 6.In view of the alternative remedy available to the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ petition. Hence, the Writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.is closed. 7.Even otherwise in this Writ petition, the Writ petition as against R1 to R3 has already been dismissed for default and no steps have been taken to restore. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Crl.Side) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Director of Municipal Administration, Chepauk,Chennai. 2.The Regional Director of Municipal Administration, Annamaligai,Madurai-20. 3.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram. 4.The Executive Officer, Keelakarai Municipality, Ramanathapuram District. W.P.(MD)No.1948 of 2011 02.11.2011 nbj/sma/16.11.2011/5c/2p https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/