Chandiran v. The Block Development Officer,

ORDER The writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the order bearing No.Na.Ka.No.3190/2026/A2 dated 02.02.2026 and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent to consider the petitioner Page2 of 6 for appointment/inclusion as boat driver at okenakkal, Dharmapuri District.

¶2The petitioner, a resident of Ootamalai Village, Hogenakkal Post, Pennagaram Taluk, Dharmapuri District, has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 02.02.2026 issued by the respondent, whereby the petitioner's request for issuance of a Parisal Boat Operator identity Card/permit was rejected on the ground that 432 parisal operators have already been issued identity cards and no new cards can be issued. Challenging the said order, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order is non-speaking, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice, as it was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It was further contended that there is no statutory provision, Government Order, or guideline fixing the maximum number of Parisal operators at 432.

¶4The learned Government Counsel submitted that the rejection was based on administrative considerations regarding the carrying capacity of the Hogenakkal Tourist Destination. This Court, vide its order dated 14.11.2025 in WP.No.43514 of 2025, had earlier directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.09.2025 and pass appropriate orders within six weeks. The impugned order dated 02.02.2026 was passed pursuant to the Page3 of 6 said direction.

¶5Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6On perusal of the impugned order, this Court finds that no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner before passing the order. The order merely states that 432 operates are sufficient, without disclosing any policy, guideline, or statutory backing for fixing such a ceiling. Such an order, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, cannot be sustained in law.

¶7In view of the above, and considering that the petitioner's livelihood is dependent on operating parisal boats, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the authorities for fresh consideration.

¶8Accordingly, the following order is passed: i. The impugned order dated 02.02.2026 issued by the respondent is hereby set aside. ii. The matter is remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration. Iii. The respondent shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and pass a reasoned/speaking order, in Page4 of 6 accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. iv. The respondent shall specifically consider and deal with the following aspects while passing the fresh order; ''a. Whether there exists any statutory provision, Government Order, Rule or guideline fixing the maximum number of Parisal boat operators for Hogenakkal; b. The petitioner's eligibility and qualification to operate a parisal boat; and c. The current tourist inflow, safety norms, and carrying capacity of the river.'' v. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim. The authority shall decide the matter independently, uninfluenced by any observations made herein.

¶9With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 03-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order rli Page5 of 6 To The Block Development Officer, Office of the BDO, Pennagaram, Dharmapuri District. Page6 of 6

M.DHANDAPANI, J. rli 03-06-2026

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 03-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and WMP.No.20298 of 2026 Chandiran W/o.Subramani, Door No.1/173, Ootamalai village, okkenagal post, pennagaram taluk, Dharmapuri District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The Block Development Officer, Office of the BDO, Pennagaram, Dharmapuri District. ..Respondent(s) Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order passed by the respondent in Na.Ka.No.3190/2026/A2 dated 02.02.2026 and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent to consider the petitioner for appointment/inclusion as boat driver at okenakkal, Dharmapuri District. For Petitioner(s): Mr. N.Stalin For Respondent(s): Mr.C.Prabakaran, Government Counsel