Accordingly, the respondents 1 to 3 are directed to remove all the obstructions in the water canal and protect the water canal under the provisions of the statutes and rules in force. 8.With these directions, the writ petition stands dismissed.  No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 24.08.2023 cse Index:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-Speaking Order To 1.The District Collector,    Office of the District Collector,    Thirupur District. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,    Udumalpet,    Thirupur District. 3.The Tahsildar,    Madathukulam,    Udumalpet,    Thirupur District. S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. cse W.P.No.11994 of 2023 24.08.2023

2023:MHC:4065

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED  : 24.08.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

  1. No.11994 of 2023and

W.M.P.Nos.11846 & 11847 of 2023

Mrs.Annapoorani

1.The District Collector,

Office of the District Collector,    Thirupur District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,    Udumalpet,

Thirupur District.

3.The Tahsildar,

Madathukulam,    Udumalpet,

Thirupur District.

4.Jothikannan

5.Manikandan

Vs. …Petitioner
6.Selvarani   …Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 27.03.2023 in  Na.Ka.No.5094/2022/A1 passed by the 2nd respondent, quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondent authorities to conduct proper enquiry by affording opportunity to the petitioner within a time frame fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sudhan
For R1 to R3 : Mr.T.Arun Kumar

Additional Government Pleader

For R4 to R6 : Mr.N.Palanikumar

ORDER

The order impugned dated 27.03.2023 passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Udumalpet rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2.The petitioner states that she had purchased the property in S.No.388/1A to an extent of 2 acres 40 cents vide Document No.2300/2021 on the file of the Kaniyur SRO, Udumalpet Taluk, Thirupur District.  The subject property has been covered by Patta No.1386.  The petitioner is in absolute possession and enjoyment of the said property.  The respondents 4 to 6 raised an allegation stating that the petitioner has encroached upon the water canal falling within her patta property.  The allegation against the writ petitioner was that she had fenced the water canal, thereby depriving all other land owners from using the canal for their lands.  The objectors are the tail end water users of the canal and by preventing them from utilizing the water, they are deprived of cultivating their lands.  Therefore, the respondents 4 to 6 filed a complaint to remove the obstructions created by the petitioner in the water canal and utilize the water canal for the benefit of all the land owners in that locality.  The Tahsildar, Madathukulam conducted an enquiry by verifying the records and passed an order on 27.12.2021.  The Tahsildar has clearly stated that the subject canal is classified as ‘Arani Vaikal’  and therefore, the petitioner has no right to obstruct the canal and such obstruction is an offence.  The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, who in turn also considered the revenue records and confirmed the order passed by the Tahsildar.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the patta was granted in the name of the petitioner and therefore, the classification now stated in the impugned order is incorrect.  He further states that there was no canal and the entire portion of the property is in possession of the petitioner and the respondents 4 to 6 are now attempting to restore the canal.

4.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 4 to 6 objected the said contention by stating that the canal is in usage by the people of that locality and the petitioner has created an obstruction subsequently after her purchase in the year 2021.  Even in the sale deed dated 24.06.2021 through which the petitioner purchased the subject property, there is a mention about the water canal in the schedule of the property.  He further submitted that when the water canal has been specifically mentioned in the sale deed executed in favour of the writ petitioner in the year 2021, there is no reason to interfere with the orders passed by the revenue authorities and thus, the writ petition is to be rejected.

5.The learned Additional Government Pleader assisted by

Mr.M.Nagaraj, Senior Revenue Inspector, Madathukkulam Taluk, Tiruppur District submitted the copy of the revenue records which would reveal that the canal was in existence.  The water canal is protected under the statute.

Therefore, the petitioner has no right to obstruct the canal or the free flow of water through the said canal.  The water canal is to be protected under the provisions of the Act.  Thus, the authorities considering the merits and verifying the revenue records passed the impugned orders.

6.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that there is a civil suit pending.

7.However, pendency of the civil suit cannot be an impediment to protect the water body by the competent authorities.  Once the subject property is a water canal and the canal is protected under the provisions of the statute, the competent authorities are bound to remove the obstructions and to ensure that the water canal is provided for the usage of the people of that locality.  In view of the fact that the petitioner has created an obstruction in the water canal and the revenue authorities found that the water canal is to be protected, the order passed by the Tahsildar and the Revenue Divisional Officer are to be implemented scrupulously and any encroachment or obstruction created in the water canal is to be removed immediately.

Accordingly, the respondents 1 to 3 are directed to remove all the obstructions in the water canal and protect the water canal under the provisions of the statutes and rules in force.

8.With these directions, the writ petition stands dismissed.  No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

24.08.2023

cse Index:Yes/No

Neutral Citation:Yes/No

Speaking order/Non-Speaking Order

To

1.The District Collector,    Office of the District Collector,    Thirupur District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,    Udumalpet,    Thirupur District.

3.The Tahsildar,

Madathukulam,    Udumalpet,

Thirupur District.

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

cse W.P.No.11994 of 2023

  1. 24.08.2023

You may also like...