The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Wednesday ordered notice to the Karur Collector and the Superintendent of Police after taking a serious view of the fact that despite its order directing the authorities to restrain private persons from going ahead with laying pipeline to extract water from a well in a land close to Amaravathi river, the work had been carried out.
A Division Bench of Justices N. Kirubakaran and B. Pugalendhi ordered notice on a public interest litigation petition filed by Village Drinking Water and Health Society of Aravakurichi. The society, represented by its treasurer P. Mani, had sought a direction to the authorities to restrain people from laying pipelines to extract water.
The judges took into account the fact that the previous Collector in October had rejected permission for the work. However, the present Collector, who took charge in November, had granted permission for the project. The court ordered a stay on the project and sought to know on what basis the Collector granted permission for laying pipelines.
During the course of the hearing, the judges expressed their shock when the counsel for the petitioner informed it that despite its order directing the authorities to restrain the private parties from going ahead with laying of pipelines, the work was carried out to an extent of three km in addition to the six km that were already covered.
The court directed the Collector and the SP to appear before it to explain why its order was not followed. However, the officials were unable to appear before the court via video conferencing, even after two hours. The court said it was initiating suo motu contempt proceedings against them.
Subsequently, the court was informed by the State that the Collector was in an interior part of Karur in connection with a farmers’ agitation, and therefore could not appear before the judges. Also, the direction to appear before the judges could not be communicated in time due to the network connectivity issues.
Taking cognisance of the submission, the court dropped the contempt proceedings, and directed the Collector to see to it that the order was followed and steps were taken to restore the area where the additional work had been carried out. The court posted the case for hearing to January 25.
