Administrative consideration of the same grievance was permitted only after withdrawal of the pending consumer complaint.

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing removal of a water pipeline laid in his patta land in Survey Nos. 53/19 and 53/20, payment of compensation, and criminal and legal action against certain officials

The Court noted that the petitioner had already sought the same relief before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Tirunelveli, in C.C. No. 196 of 2024, and that he was in dispute with the private respondents

Whether the Court could grant the requested writ relief where the petitioner had already sought the same relief before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Whether the petitioner could pursue the grievance by making a representation to the concerned official respondent after withdrawing the consumer complaint

The petition invoked the High Court’s jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

The petitioner’s pending consumer complaint was stated to have been filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

The Court cited no precedents or further substantive legal rules; it held that the relief sought in the writ petition could not be granted in the manner requested

The Court noted that the petitioner had already approached the Consumer Commission for the same relief and was also at loggerheads with the private respondents

In those circumstances, it declined to grant the requested relief through the writ petition, stating that the reliefs sought before both forums could not be countenanced and that the writ relief could not be granted in the manner sought

It nevertheless permitted the petitioner to make a representation to the concerned official respondent, provided he first withdrew the consumer complaint

No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed