S.Pandi Vs The District Collector

S.Pandi vs The District Collector

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jan 20, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1676320

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1676320
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr Justice Krishnan Ramasamy
Decided On: Jan 20, 2026
Case Number: WP(MD)/28342/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

S.Pandi

Respondent

The District Collector

Excerpt

.....village panchayath, thiruvadanai taluk, ramanathapuram district, within the time stipulated by this court.2. the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner wouldsubmit that though the government has allotted fund for laying the road, the respondents cannot take steps to lay the road. hence, the petitioner made a representation before the respondents on 04.11.2023 seeking to lay the road from mariamman kovil keezha veethi to periya pandi veedu nearly 45 meters (148 feet) in chirukambior village panchayath, thiruvadanai taluk, ramanathapuram district. since the same was not considered till date, the petitioner has approached this court.3. the learned special government pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 3 would submit that the representation of the petitioner dated 04.11.2023 would be considered in accordance with law.4. considering the facts and circumstances of the case,without going into the merits of the matter, this court directs the second respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 04.11.2023, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.5. with the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. there shall be no order as to costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. vsm index : yes/no ncc : yes/nokrishnan ramasamy, j.vsm to

Full Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.01.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY and W.M.P.(MD)No.24405 of 2023 S.Pandi ... Petitioner Vs
5. K.Ramalingam ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1 st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.11.2023 for laying the road from Mariamman Kovil Keezha Veethi to Periya Pandi veedu nearly 45 meters (148 feet) in Chirukambior Village Panchayath, Thiruvadanai Taluk, Ramanathapuram District, within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.H.Velavadhas For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasubramani, Spl. Govt.Pleader for R1 & R3 Mr.P.Arun Jaytram for R2 & R4 No Appearance for R5

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Mandamus as against the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.11.2023 for laying the road from Mariamman Kovil Keezha Veethi to Periya Pandi Veedu nearly 45 meters (148 feet) in Chirukambior Village Panchayath, Thiruvadanai Taluk, Ramanathapuram District, within the time stipulated by this Court.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would

submit that though the Government has allotted fund for laying the road, the respondents cannot take steps to lay the road. Hence, the petitioner made a representation before the respondents on 04.11.2023 seeking to lay the road from Mariamman Kovil Keezha Veethi to Periya Pandi Veedu nearly 45 meters (148 feet) in Chirukambior Village Panchayath, Thiruvadanai Taluk, Ramanathapuram District. Since the same was not considered till date, the petitioner has approached this Court.

3. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 3 would submit that the representation of the petitioner dated 04.11.2023 would be considered in accordance with law.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,

without going into the merits of the matter, this Court directs the second respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 04.11.2023, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. vsm Index : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

vsm To

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2026 Same Parties S.Pandi vs The District Collector Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice Krishnan Ramasamy