V.Arunkarthi v. The District Collector,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 29-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN WP.No

s .19431

and 22633

of 2026

and WMP.N

os .20709, 20710, 24548

and

28279

of 2026

V.Arunkarthi ..Petitioner in WP.No.19431 of 2026 Dharmalingam ..Petitioner in WP.No.22633 of 2026 Vs

¶1The District collector, Office of the Collectorate, Tiruppur District.

¶2The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Office of the Collectorate, Tiruppur, Tiruppur District.

¶3The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharapuram Sub Division, Tiruppur District.

¶4The Tahsildar, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District.

¶5The Block Development Officer, Vellakovil, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District.

¶6The Block Development Officer, Mulanur, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District.

¶7The Superintendent of Police, Tiruppur District, Tiruppur.

¶8M/s.First Energy 10 Pvt, Unit No.601, 6th Floor, Cello Planitina, F.C.Road, Shivaji Nagar, Pune - 411 005. ..Respondents in both cases PRAYER in WP.No.19431 of 2026: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the

records

relating

to

the

impugned

proceedings

in Na.Ka.No.23273/2025/E5 dated 24.12.2025 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same. PRAYER in WP.No.22633 of 2026: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1 to 7 respondents to remove the High Tension Transmission Lines erected by the 8th respondent by violating the conditions of the 1st respondent thereby encroaching the water channels, rivulets and channels, burial ground of the Kannivadi Village, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District. For Petitioner: in WP.No.19434 of 2026 For Petitioner: in WP.No.22633 of 2026 Mr.V.Raghavachari Senior Counsel for M.Arun Mr.Hasan Mohammed Jinnah Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Udyakumar For Respondents: in both cases Mr.R.Veeramani Government Pleader for R1 to R4 Mr.S.J.Mohamed Sathik Standing Counsel for R5 & R6 Mr.M.M.I.Khaleel Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for R7 Mr.J.Ravindran Senior Counsel for Ms.C.G.Athisaya for R8 COMMON ORDER (Order of the Court was made by G.Arul Murugan, J.) W.P.No.19431 of 2026 has been filed challenging the order of the first respondent/District Collector, dated 24.12.2025, whereby permission was granted to eighth respondent to draw High Tension Transmission Lines (HTTL).

¶2W.P.No.22633 of 2026 has been filed to direct the official respondents to remove the HTTL erected by eighth respondent by violating the conditions imposed by first respondent.

¶3The petitioner in W.P.No.19431 of 2026 states that the eighth respondent, which is a private limited company, is implementing a solar power project, for which, an application dated 28.09.2025 was made to the first respondent seeking permission for erecting 33KV electric poles for transmitting power from the windmills located at Karur and Tiruppur to their sub-station at Kannivadi Village, Moolanur, Tiruppur District. The first respondent, vide order dated 24.12.2025, granted permission for the same, however, subject to certain conditions. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the said permission was granted without following G.O.

(Ms) No.101, Water Resources (R2) Department, dated 30.09.2024. It is his further grievance that the erection of poles in the water bodies would be detrimental in destructing the free flow of water, thereby affecting the interests of agriculturists. In these circumstances, he prays for quashing the order of the first respondent dated 24.12.2025.

¶4The petitioner in W.P.No.22633 of 2026 states that despite the order passed by the first respondent, the eighth respondent has proceeded to lay the electric poles in violation and therefore, the poles erected have to be removed.

¶5Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respective petitioners submit that the District Collector, while granting permission in favour of the eighth respondent, has not complied with the conditions stipulated in G.O.(Ms) No.101, dated 30.09.2024, wherein a detailed set of procedures is drawn for granting permission, particularly, for water bodies. When the order passed by the District Collector is not in consonance with G.O.(Ms) No.101, the same needs to be interfered with and any poles erected, pursuant to the order dated 24.12.2025, are directed to be removed, thereby safeguarding the interest of the petitioners.

¶6Learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4 submits that the District Collector has considered the application filed by eighth respondent and after conducting a detailed enquiry and calling for report from the authorities, passed the impugned order setting-out certain conditions, in due compliance of G.O.(Ms) No.101. He further submits that the authorities are strictly monitoring the implementation of conditions imposed by the District Collector.

¶7We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective counsel and perused the materials available on record.

¶8It is not in dispute that the first respondent/District Collector, vide impugned order dated 24.12.2025, has imposed certain conditions while granting permission to the eighth respondent to erect 33KV electric poles for transmitting power. However, the only grievance of the petitioners is that the District Collector has accorded permission without application of mind and without considering the conditions set-forth in G.O.(Ms) No.101, dated 30.09.2024.

¶9The District Collector has filed a detailed counter-affidavit, setting-forth the procedures undertaken by him before granting permission to the eighth respondent. It is the specific stand of the District Collector that the proposal of eighth respondent was processed and considered strictly in accordance with G.O.(Ms) No.101, thereby denying the allegations of petitioners.

¶10From the perusal of records, it is seen that petitioners herein had already approached this Court by way of filing writ petitions with similar prayers. One such writ petition filed by V.Arunkarthi in W.P.No.9773 of 2026 was dismissed on 11.03.2026 with liberty to challenge the order of first respondent dated 24.12.2025 and another writ petition filed by Dharmalingam in W.P.No.11993 of 2026 was disposed of on 27.03.2026 by directing the District Collector to consider the representation dated 15.02.2026 in accordance with law and pass a reasoned and speaking order, as expeditiously as possible. Relevant portion of the order dated 27.03.2026 is extracted hereunder:- "2. In that regard, petitioner has already submitted a representation before the District Collector on

15.02.2026 and the same is still pending.

¶3Without commenting upon the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to the District Collector to consider the representation of petitioner dated 15.02.2026 in accordance with law and pass a reasoned and speaking order, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the interim application is closed."

¶11In view of the order extracted above, it is clear that the petitioners have approached this Court in one way or other in order to ensure that the electric poles drawn by the eighth respondent are removed. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that when the petitioners have already filed writ petitions, which were also disposed of by this Court, the present writ petitions filed by them with similar relief cannot be sustained. However, since this Court has already given a direction in the earlier writ petition filed by Dharmalingam, which is yet to be acted upon by the District Collector, we deem it appropriate to direct the District Collector to pass a detailed order, based on the grievance expressed by the petitioners in this regard, in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The District Collector shall pass such an order, without any breach, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

¶12In the result, W.P.No.19431 of 2026 is disposed of and W.P.No.22633 of 2026 is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. (SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CJ.) (G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.) 29-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order hvk To

1.The District Collector, Office of the Collectorate, Tiruppur District.

2.The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Office of the Collectorate, Tiruppur, Tiruppur District.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharapuram Sub Division, Tiruppur District.

4.The Tahsildar, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District.

5.The Block Development Officer, Vellakovil, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District.

6.The Block Development Officer, Mulanur, Dharapuram Taluk, Tiruppur District.

7.The Superintendent of Police, Tiruppur District, Tiruppur. WP.Nos.19431,&,22633,of,2026 SUSHRUT,ARVIND,DHARMADHIKARI,,CJ. AND G.ARUL,MURUGAN,J. hvk ,WP.No,,s,,.19431,,and,22633,,of,2026, 29-07-2026 Page,10,of,10