Authorities may proceed with public road construction within the designated survey land, notwithstanding private obstruction.

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a mandamus directing respondents 1 to 4—the District Collector, Tahsildar, Block Development Officer, and Village Panchayat President—to complete the laying of a road in a public pathway situated in Survey No.63/3, Arasathoor Village, Ramanathapuram District, pursuant to his representation dated 10.10.2023.

The petitioner asserted that the road was required by him and the village residents, but that the fifth respondent, who occupied land in Survey No.63/4, was obstructing the work.

The fifth respondent had instituted O.S.No.71 of 2023 before the District Munsif Court, Thiruvadanai; that suit was dismissed for default on 14.11.2024.

The Government clarified that the proposed road would be laid only in Survey No.63/3 and not in Survey No.63/4.

The Court exercised its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to consider the petitioner’s claim for a writ of mandamus.

The governing principle is that mandamus may be issued to compel public authorities to perform a public or statutory duty where the entitlement to such performance is established.

The Court also applied the principle that a person claiming rights in one parcel of land cannot obstruct public work lawfully confined to a distinct survey number.

No specific statutory provision or judicial precedent was cited in the judgment; the decision turned on the authorities’ clarification regarding the precise survey number in which the road would be laid.

The Court noted that the petition concerned the completion of a public road in Survey No.63/3 and that the alleged obstruction arose from the fifth respondent’s occupation of Survey No.63/4.

Since the Government clarified that the road would be laid exclusively in Survey No.63/3, the Court found that the fifth respondent had no basis to obstruct the work on the ground that it affected Survey No.63/4.

The dismissal for default of O.S.No.71 of 2023 was also recorded as part of the procedural background.

On that basis, the Court directed the public authorities to proceed with the road work and treated the petitioner’s request as warranting appropriate mandamus relief.

Respondents 1 to 4 were directed to proceed with and complete the road work in Survey No.63/3 within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

The writ petition was accordingly disposed of, with no order as to costs.