Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 1643 (MAD)

N. Murari v. State of Tamil Nadu & Others

2004-12-03

N.V.BALASUBRAMANIAN, R.BANUMATHI

body2004
Judgment :- R. Banumathi, J. This Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Second Respondent to remove the construction and laying of pipeline for linking the drainage CD in the sketch attached herewith into the canal AB and consequently, direct the Third Respondent to take appropriate steps to prevent linking of drainage into the Channel. 2. The Petitioner is residing at No.59/1 New Street, opposite Bus Stand Kulithalai, Karur District. Case of the Petitioner is that there a Channel which is marked as AB in the sketch. AB channel runs West to East. The water in the channel was used for irrigating agricultural lands about 15 years ago. But, for more than a decade ago, the water in the channel is not being used for irrigating agricultural lands. Since most of the agricultural lands were converted to vacant lands and houses and other buildings were put up by the inhabitants. Since the water is not being used for agricultural purposes, the width of the Canal was also narrowed considerably. The Petitioner has stated that the Second respondent / Kulithalai Municipality is attempting to join the drainage marked as CD. The proposed drainage carries waster and refuse of the hotels and the drainage water which includes dry Lavatory waster from nearly 50 houses in addition to the silt causing damage to the nearby buildings. The Petitioner opposes laying and joining of CD and AB canal on the ground that by joining the drainage with the existing canal Water pollution would be caused and that would not only affect the human beings, but also animals and birds. The ground water would be affected rendering the water unfit for human consumption. Further case of the Petitioner is that it is the duty of the Government to maintain and protect environment since they have to prevent the water pollution. Letting of waste water through the private properties of the Petitioner and other inhabitants would cause health hazards and hence, the Petitioner seeks an interim order restraining the second respondent from linking CD drainage with canal AB. 3. AB channel is running in front of the house of the Petitioner. The said channel was dug during the British period and the same was used for irrigating the agricultural lands. 3. AB channel is running in front of the house of the Petitioner. The said channel was dug during the British period and the same was used for irrigating the agricultural lands. But, for the past 15 years, the said channel is not used for agrarian purpose due to development of the town. The Petitioner’s house itself is situated on an agricultural land comprising of about 4 acres. the land on which the petitioner has constructed his house was used as an agricultural land and the same was irrigated only through the channel which is running in front of the house. After opening of the bus stand, the said land was converted into Housing Plots. The Petitioner’s land is situated in the middle and the tail end of the channel. 4. We may at the outset point out that the Petitioner opposed joining of drainage linking CD with the existing AB channel. For appreciation of the contentious points, it is necessary to have clear understanding of the location of the channel and drainage and the difficulties that are faced by the second respondent Municipality. The difficulties that are faced by the Second Respondent Municipality on account of stagnation of rain water is amply made clear in the averments in the counter. 5. The area covered by the Kulithalai Municipality is hardly about 10.6 sq.K.M. Kulithalai was an Agrarain village, situated at the South Bank of Cauvery river. A high level channel which runs East West 4 K.M North South 2.5 K.M receives water from Mayanur Bed Regulator for 11 months in a year for agricultural purposes. Most of the land in Kulithalai Municipality belongs to Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment. The Bus stand is also situated on the temple land under long term lease. No poramboke or Natham lands belonging to the Government are available. 6. From the Counter Statement of the Second Respondent, it is seen that most of the office like Sub-Court, Taluk Office, Revenue Divisional Office, Police Station, Post Officer, Taluk Treasury, Travellers Bungalow and Government Girls Higher Secondary School are situated in the heart of the town. During rainy season, due to lack of drainage facility, the water gets stagnated and the day to day movement and other normal activities become impossible. During rainy season, due to lack of drainage facility, the water gets stagnated and the day to day movement and other normal activities become impossible. Every year, with the co-operation of Public Works Department, the Second Respondent has drained the water by opening through the Travellers Bungalow to the High Level Channel which runs behind the Travelers Bungalow abutting North. The stagnation of water also brings with health hazards to the Public. 7. In the Counter Statement, the Second Respondent has also stated that in order to avoid such complications and inconvenience to the public and the school going children, the Municipal Council of Kulithalai Municipality decided to construct a small channel from the water pooling area and connect the same with the channel which runs in front of the Petitioner’s house. This will bring about a permanent solution to the stagnation of water on the Karur-Trichy main Road. Under such circumstances, the channel which runs in front of the Petitioner’s house would be connected with the channel proposed to be constructed by the Municipality and as a result, the prolonged pooling and stagnancy of water will be cleared by Natural means. On behalf of the Second Respondent, it is contended that joining CD with AB channel is only available source of bringing the stagnated rain water because of the non-availability of Waste land within the Municipality the Second respondent has taken steps through the District Collectorate for acquisition of land for the purpose of installing “Sewage Treatment Plant Site”. If the said process is over, all the drainage channels would be connected and pool it for oxidilation. The proposal in this regard has been sent to the Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department on 30.08.2001 and to the TWAD Board on 16.11.2001. 8. The main allegations are levelled only against the Petitioner. It is stated that vast extent of nearly 4 acres of land belonging to the Petitioner was converted into residential cum commercial area for their own benefits. The entire area, which was agricultural land is said to have been converted as business complexes, shopping complexes, hotel, lodge, residential complexes, community hall. It is alleged that the community hall situated in the Petitioner land is the main reason for stagnation of water in the said channel. The entire area, which was agricultural land is said to have been converted as business complexes, shopping complexes, hotel, lodge, residential complexes, community hall. It is alleged that the community hall situated in the Petitioner land is the main reason for stagnation of water in the said channel. The Second Respondent Municipality has mainly alleged that the Petitioner has not made any provision for the disposal of the drainage and other materials from his business enterprises and the residential complexes situated in his land. Wastage materials are let into the channels by the Petitioner and his tenants. It is further alleged that only the Petitioner’s family and the tenants are solely responsible for causing pollution in the channel. In this regard, the Second Respondent Municipality has made internal raids to check illegal connection of dry latrines, drainage to the irrigation channel and to find out those who are not following hygienic measures. Notices have also been issued to those who are connecting to the irrigation channel. One such notice was also issued to the family members of the Petitioner during 1998-99 and Revenue Divisional Officer has also issued the notice to the Petitioner on 29.06.2001. It is alleged that the Petitioner has suppressed all the facts and filed the writ petition to prevent the on going welfare activities of the Respondent and the Petitioner, who has approached the Court with unclean hands is not entitled for the relief sought for in this Writ Petition. 9. We are not inclined to go into the details of the allegations levelled against the Petitioner. We find that neither the petitioner's counsel, nor the petitioner appeared before us. However, on consideration of the averments in the counter and the difficulties faced by Kulithalai Municipality, we are of the view that there has to be a drainage CD which is to be joined with AB. We find from the location of CD drainage AB channel that one CD drainage is joined with AB channel, the water and sewages might get silted and there might be sewage of drainage water affecting the underground water. 10. After getting permission from Public Works Department, the alleged channel AB is said to have been disilted and removed the long years of deposit by spending Rs.1,54,247/- and cleaning the sewages process is going on twice in a month through manual labour. 10. After getting permission from Public Works Department, the alleged channel AB is said to have been disilted and removed the long years of deposit by spending Rs.1,54,247/- and cleaning the sewages process is going on twice in a month through manual labour. The Third Respondent has taken steps to insist Public Works Department to hand over the channels to the respondent through letters dated 23.03.2001 and 16.11.2001 and correspondence is pending. Maintenance of AB channel is under the control and maintenance of Public Works Department is not yet handed over. During the arguments, we find that the Public Works Department is a necessary party and to be impleaded as Fourth Respondent in the Writ Petition. By the order of the Court dated 08.11.2004, Public Works Department was made a party. 11. Unless CD drainage is allowed to join with AB channel, there would be further stagnation of rain water as submitted by the Second Respondent. To avoid stagnation of rain water, we find that it is fit to issue the following directions:- i. Fourth Respondent / Public Works Department is directed to hand over the land in which AB and CD channel are running to the Second Respondent Municipality within a period of two months from the date of this order; ii. If the land over which AB and CD channels are running is not handed over by the fourth respondent P.W.D. to the Municipality within the period of two months, the fourth respondent is directed to do and execute the temporary work of forming, constructing CD channel and joining the same with AB channel and also hand over the land to the Municipality within a period of two months thereafter; and iii. Once the land is handed over to the Second Respondent, the Municipality would in turn form AB and CD channel of permanent nature with cement flooring (to avoid any seepage of water) and cement slabs covered on the top. iv. When doing the permanent work, the Municipal authorities or the P.W.D. authorities are also directed to lay suitable pipelines so that waste and drainage water passing through CD channel would not mix with clean water passing through AB channel, to avoid pollution in this matter. 12. This Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner, directing the Second Respondent to remove the construction and laying of pipeline for linking the drainage CD into the channel AB. 12. This Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner, directing the Second Respondent to remove the construction and laying of pipeline for linking the drainage CD into the channel AB. In view of the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. The connected W.P.M.P is closed.