Madras High CourtWP/20219/2019disposed of

C.Palani, v. The District Collector, (Deleted)

2019-07-19Honourable Mr Justice N. Anand Venkatesh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Special Original Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Eleventh day of July Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH WP No.20219 of 2019 C.PALANI, [ PETITIONER ] Vs 1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, [ RESPONDENTS ] KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT, KRISHNAGIRI.

R1 DELETED AS PER ORDER DATED 11/07/2019 BY NAVJ IN WP.20219/2019.

2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT, KRISHNAGIRI.

3 THE TAHSILDAR, KRISHNAGIRI TALUK, KRISHNAGIRI.DISTRICT 4 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT, KRISHNAGIRI 5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAVERIPATTINAM POLICE STATION KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT.

6 GOVINDAN, Writ Petitions under article 226 of the Constitutions of India praying that in these circumstances stated therein and in the respective affidavits filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 5 to take appropriate action against the 6th respondent and his vagaiyara from conducting the temple festival scheduled to be held on 12/07/2019 or on any other subsequent dates in respect of the temple namely Arulmigu Beemesswaran Thirukkovil, situate at Beemanur village, Karadihalli Panchayat, Kaveripattinam Panchayat Union Krishnagiri Taluk and District based on petitioners objection dated 08/07/2019 forthwith(in WP.20219/2019)

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of PRABAKARAN C., Advocate for the petitioner and of MR.M.MOHAMED RIYAZ ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the respondents 1 to 5 and of the 6th respondent not appearing either in person or by an Advocate the court made the following order:- While passing this order, the name of the counsel who represented for 6th respondent in Crl.O.P.No.17465 of 2019 was printed in the cause list and in spite of the same, there was no representation for the 6th respondent. The first respondent is not a necessary party in this case and the same is deleted. 2.This Court passed an earlier order in Crl.O.P.No.17465 of 2019 dated 04.07.2019 permitting the 6th respondent to conduct the temple festival.

While passing this order, this Court was not aware of the fact that there is a pending dispute between the parties with regard to the right over the temple and that a litigation is pending before the competent Civil Court. It is now seen that if the temple festival is conducted by one of the parties, it will surely lead to law and order problem.

3.In view of the above, the order passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.17465 of 20109 dated 04.07.2019, is kept in abeyance.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor takes notice for respondents 2 to 5. Notice to the 6th respondent returnable in four weeks. Private notice is also permitted. Post the matter after four weeks.

-sd/- 11/07/2019 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar ( Statistics / C.S. ) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT, KRISHNAGIRI.

2 THE TAHSILDAR, KRISHNAGIRI TALUK, KRISHNAGIRI.DISTRICT

3 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT, KRISHNAGIRI 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAVERIPATTINAM POLICE STATION, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT.

C.C. to MR.C.PRABAKARAN Advocate SR.NO. 8726 Order in WP.20219/2019 Date :11/07/2019 From 26.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Interim Orders in this format VS 11.07.2019 (I.T)