SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 42215

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. Dhandapani, J
Marathal – Appellant
Versus
Superintending Engineer (WRD) – Respondent
Writ Petition



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: N. Subramaniyan
For the Respondents: M. Rajendiran

State authorities are obligated to verify and restore established irrigation facilities disrupted by public infrastructure works upon due technical assessment and field inspection.

Headnote:The petitioner filed a writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash an impugned letter and compel the authorities to provide an alternate water intake point for irrigation purposes following the destruction of the existing canal infrastructure during highway widening. The petitioner argued that the lack of irrigation since 2016 necessitated administrative intervention. The core issue was whether the administrative authorities were required to rectify the disruption to established irrigation facilities caused by public infrastructure works. The court observed that the grievance necessitated a technical assessment and field verification to ensure water reaches the subject lands without prejudice to other stakeholders. The court directed the respondents to convene a meeting with the relevant stakeholders, conduct a field inspection, and pass appropriate orders within twelve weeks.

Table of Content
1. summary of rival contentions and need for technical verification. (Para 4 , 3 , 4)
2. summary of facts involving disruption of irrigation due to highway widening. (Para 1 , 2)
3. court directive for administrative action and inspection to restore irrigation. (Para 5 , 6)

4. The District Collector Tiruppur District, Collectorate, Tiruppur -641 601 ..Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records on the file of the 3rd respondent relating to the impugned letter in Lr. No.297 E Ko.70/AEE/Pongalur/2025 dated 30.09.2025 and quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents to provide an alternate intake point at Sluice No.11 from the sub canal of the Parambikula Azhiyar Project to supply water to the Petitioner’s lands situated in Survey Nos.97/1A and 116/1B2 of the South Avinasipalayam Village, South Tiruppur Taluk and Tirupur District instead of the already ruined intake point from the said Sub-canal at Sluice No.10 and thereby to restore the irrigational facility to the said petitioners as per the PAP Scheme within a time frame.

For Petitioner : Mr. N. Subramaniyan For Respondents : Mr. M. Rajendiran Addl. Govt. Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed to call for the records on the file of the

3rd respondent relating to the impugned letter in Lr. No.297 E Ko.70/AEE/Pongalur/2025 dated 30.09.2025 and quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents to provide an alternate intake point at Sluice No.11 from the sub canal of the Parambikula Azhiyar Project to supply water to the Petitioner’s lands situated in Survey Nos.97/1A and 116/1B2 of the South Avinasipalayam Village, South Tiruppur Taluk and Tirupur District instead of the already ruined intake point from the said Sub-canal at Sluice No.10 and thereby to restore the irrigational facility to the said petitioners as per the PAP Scheme within a time frame.

2. Short facts :-

a) It is stated that the petitioner is an agriculturist owning lands irrigated under the Parambikulam Aliyar Project (PAP) Scheme through a distributary line drawing water from the main canal near sluice No.10. During the widening of the National Highways, the existing distributary water line, pump sets and underground pipelines were damaged and blocked, resulting in disruption of irrigation to the petitioner’s agricultural lands measuring about 10.75 acres.

b) It is further stated that the petitioner submitted various representations lastly on 29.09.2025 requesting the respondents to restore the irrigation system and to shift the distribution point from the existing location to an alternate point near the lands, without increasing the ayacut area or quantum of water and without causing prejudice to any other ayacutdar. On 30.09.2025, the 3rd respondent conducted a field inspection and acknowledged that the existing canal branch had been blocked due to the highway widening works. The said proceedings dated 30.09.2025 issued by the 3rd respondent is put under challenge in this writ petition. However, the respondents insisted that the petitioner obtain consent from all ayacutdars through the Village Administrative Officer for providing a new sub-branch, which the petitioner contended was arbitrary. Thereafter, by representation dated 03.11.2025, she clarified that only a change in the intake point for the already existing authorised sub-branch canal irrigating 10.74 acres was sought, and that no new connection or additional lands were proposed. Though the 1st respondent, on 20.11.2025, directed the 2nd respondent to take steps to restore irrigation facilities, no effective action was taken. Aggrieved by the inaction and continued denial of efficient irrigation facilities, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the widening of the National Highways, the existing distributary water line was damaged

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top