A.Venkatesan v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.12.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR A.Venkatesan ... Petitioner vs.
1. The District Collector Chengalpattu District.
2. The Tahsildar Pallavaram Taluk Chennai-600 044.
3. The Inspector of Police T-13, Chitlapakkam Police Station Chennai-600 064.
.. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents herein from interfering with the peaceful running of the Navapashana Sri Dhandayuthapani Thirukoil at No.17 N. Mosque St, Maruthi Nagar, Hasthinapuram Chrompet, Chennai Tamil nadu 600064 in the guise of inspecting the idol therein, without issuing prior notice to the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Magesh Kumar For Respondents : Mr.S.Balamurugan for R1& R2 Government Advocate Mr.L.Baskaran for R3 Government Advocate(Crl.side) 1/4
O R D E R
By consent of both the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as respondents, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself.
2. The writ petition is filed seeking issue of writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents from interfering with the peaceful administration of the Navapashana Sri Dhandayuthapani Thirukoil situated at No.17 N, Mosque St, Maruthi Nagar, Hasthinapuram Chrompet, Chennai-600064 in the guise of inspecting the idol, without issuing any prior notice to the petitioner.
3. The 2nd respondent filed a status report stating that a complaint was received from one Ramesh Kumar as if Navapashana Sri Dhandayuthapani idol installed in the above mentioned temple was damaged. Based on the complaint, idol was inspected by respondents 1 and 2 in the presence of the petitioner. Subsequently, as per the decision taken in the peace committee meeting, the complainant Ramesh Kumar was also allowed to inspect the idol on 28.11.2024. Subsequently, an order was passed by the 2nd 2/4
respondent requesting the HR &CE Department to initiate proceedings to take over the temple. Further, 2nd respondent also passed an order prohibiting the petitioner and his brother Mr.Kitcha @ Krishnamoorthy from managing the temple.
4. A perusal of the status report filed by the 2nd respondent would suggest that already prohibitory order has been passed by the 2nd respondent against the petitioner on 12.12.2024. It is open to the petitioner to challenge the said order in accordance with law.
5. In view of the order passed by the 2nd respondent, the prayer sought for in this writ petition has become infructuous. Therefore, the writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 12.12.2024 in the manner known to law. No costs.
16.12.2024 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No nr 3/4
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
nr To
1. The District Collector Chengalpattu District.
2. The Tahsildar Pallavaram Taluk Chennai-600 044.
3. The Inspector of Police T-13, Chitlapakkam Police Station Chennai-600 064.
16.12.2024 4/4