Holding that the compliance of the earlier direction of the Madras High Court has not been followed for the construction of the drainage and sewage water system, the first division bench of the Madras HC ordered the Secretary for Municipal Administration and Water Supply department before the court on January 28.
The principal seat comprising Acting Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and PD Audikesavalu ruled this on hearing a plea moved by P Ayyamperumal from Madippakkam.
The petitioner prayed for a direction to the state government to complete the preparation of Detailed Project Report (DPR) for providing underground sewerage scheme to Madipakkam as informed vide letter dated May 17, 2019, and undertake and complete the drainage work in a time-bound manner.
When the matter was taken up for hearing on Wednesday, the bench held that it has found prima facie evidence against the Secretary, Municipal Administration & Water Supply Department, Managing Director, Chennai Metro Water Supply & Sewerage Board (CMWSSB), Superintending Engineer, Chennai Metro Water Supply & Sewerage Board (CMWSSB) and S Aravind Ramesh, MLA, Shozhinganallur constituency for not following a court order dated July 15, 2019.
In 2019, the Tamil Nadu government filed a status report before a division bench explaining that the drainage works are on in Madippakkam and it would be completed by 2020. Therefore, the bench comprising Justices S Manikumar and Subramonium Prasad recorded the submissions and passed directions to complete the same.
However, it has not been completed so far. When the first bench came to the issue, the ACJ held that despite a tender being received to raise construction of the drainage and sewerage system, no action was taken. “We find that the compliance of the directions has not been made even as per the latest status report and there is nothing on record to show that extension of time was sought for carrying out the directions,” the bench held.
“The respondents are directed to be present before this court on January 28, 2022 in the office of the Additional Advocate General, if virtual hearing continues or otherwise, they shall be physically present before this court, for passing further orders,” the judges noted.