(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents, their men, agents, servants or anybody claiming under them from in any manner proceeding with or continuing the construction of the proposed Kasivu Neer Kuttai (Percolation Pond)/Check Dam/Earthen Bund at Planthinnipatti Kaappukadu, Vennandur Union, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District by obstructing, diverting or altering the traditional natural watercourse feeding Kurukkapuram Eri (Tank No.17) by considering the petitioner’s representations dated 27.07.2026, 30.072026 and 04.08.2026.)

G. Arul Murugan, J.

1. This writ petition, styled as public interest litigation, is filed to enjoin the respondents from continuing with the construction of the proposed Kasivu Neer Kuttai (Percoloation Pond/Check Dam/Earthen Bund) at Palanthinnipatti Kaappukadu, Vennandur Union, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District by obstructing, diverting or altering the traditional natural watercourse feeding Kurukkapuram Eri (Tank No.17) by considering the petitioner’s representations dated 27.7.2026, 30.07.2026 and 04.08.2026, respectively.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that Kurukkapuram lake is an ancient irrigation tank catering to the irrigation needs of Kurukkapuram, Kalyani, Elur and several downstream villages. Now the Forest Department has undertaken construction of percolation pond inside the reserve forest area at Palanthinnipatti Kaappukadu. It is the grievance of the petitioner that, if the percolation pond is allowed to be completed, then, the entire natural course of water would get stopped and Kurukkapuram lake will not be getting any water from the forest area. It is further stated that, if the lake does not get water from the forest area, the entire agricultural lands and the inhabitants around the villages would suffer. In this regard, the petitioner has made representation to the authorities to stop construction thereby to allow the natural stream of water to be continued as in existence.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no immediate necessity for the Forest Department to construct percolation pond and such construction is being made only to provide water to the poultry farm owners in the nearby area. He further submitted that the embankment is now made to the height starting from 1.5 meters to 2.5 meters thereby the entire water stream coming from the forest area would be blocked and there will be no water let out to the nearby dams or any of the wells in the agricultural fields and the entire agriculturists would suffer.

4. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1, 2, 4 and 5 submitted that the allegations that the water streams are blocked and the source of water to the nearby dams would get stopped are completely baseless and he submitted that no such stream or natural water flow is blocked in the process and only embankment is made in the adjoining forest area to provide water source to the animals mainly in the summer season, as otherwise they trench upon the agricultural fields endangering their lives and the lives of the residents, besides destroying the agricultural fields. To balance the situation and to address the needs, the Forest Department had only ventured into construction of the percolation pond, which would be beneficial both to the animals and also to the nearby agriculturists.

5. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record.

6. The photographs filed in the typed-set of papers reveal that in the adjoining forest land, the Forest Department is putting up percolation pond by providing embankment to the height starting from 1.5 meters to 2.5 meters with the main purpose of getting the water stored in the adjoining forest area which would satisfy the drinking water needs of animals. During rainy season, if the rain water is getting stored in the embankment made, it not only feeds the animals in the forest, but also the water stored in the percolation pond would be beneficial to all the agriculturists nearby where their wells and bore wells will also get water source from this percolation pond. Further, the embankment is only to the height starting from 1.5 meters to 2.5 meters and if there is any excess flow of water, naturally the same would get over-flowed and will reach the nearby area.

7. The statement of learned Special Government Pleader that no such natural water stream or river is found nearby this forest area where the embankment is made blocking the channel is recorded. Further, the petitioner has not produced any material to contend that any such river or water stream is actually in existence and the embankment of the percolation pond affects or blocks any natural stream of water. Further, the allegation that this is undertaken by the Forest Department only to facilitate the poultry farms nearby is also bereft of any material. If at all any water resource is created, it cannot be for the benefit of any particular individual/concern, but it would also be in the collective interest of the agriculturists in the nearby villages.

8. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any merit in the allegations made in the writ petition and, accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.