← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/3416/2025disposed of

Sundar v. The District Collector

2025-02-06Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal7 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 06.02.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Sundar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Thirunelveli.

2.The Tahsildar, Ambasamudhram.

3.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli.

4.The Inspector of Police, Ambasamudram Police Station, Ambasamudram.

5.P.S.M.Arumugam ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to take action to permit the petitioner to participate in all the village temple functions based on petitioner's representation, dated 28.11.2024 and pass such further or other orders as this Court.

1/7

For Petitioner : Mr.T.A.Ebenezer For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.M.Senthil Ayyanar Government Advocate (Civil Side) For R-3 & R-4 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor For R-5 : Mr.P.P.Alwin Balan

ORDER

The present petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to take action to permit the petitioner to participate in all the Village and Temple functions based on the petitioner's representation, dated 28.11.2024.

2. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is residing in Biramahdesam Village, Ambasamudhram Taluk and totally, there are 60 families are residing there. There is a Muppidathi Amman Temple for the caste people of the petitioner and they used to conduct festivals. While so, in the year 2015, a dispute arose between the parties. Thereafter, on 24.04.2015, the first respondent conducted a Peace Committee Meeting and resolved the dispute by ensuring that both groups would conduct the Temple 2/7

festival to the year 2017 in a peaceful manner. However, the fifth respondent and others were not allowed the petitioner to take part in any activities related to the said Temple and not even collected any tax from the petitioner. When the same was questioned by the petitioner, they excommunicated the family of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner sent a representation, dated 28.11.2024 to all the respondents requesting to take action against the fifth respondent and three other villagers and to permit the petitioner to take part in the Temple festival on January 19, 20 and 21. But no action was taken. Therefore, the petitioner filed this petition.

3. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that there are no truth in the allegations made in the petition and as per the enquiry, no any excommunication as alleged by the petitioner and there is a Temple dispute between the parties. Therefore, this present petition is filed.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 3 and 4 would submit that there is no any excommunication as alleged by the petitioner and there are disputes between the parties in respect of 3/7

conducting Temple festivals. Therefore, Peace Committee Meeting was convened in the year 2017 and the dispute was compromised and thereafter, no any dispute between the parties.

5. The learned Counsel appearing for the fifth respondent would submit that the fifth respondent never restrained the petitioner from conducting festival and worshipping the deity of Muppidathi Amman and they never excommunicated the petitioner as alleged in the petition. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

6. Heard the learned Counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.

7. According to the petitioner, in the year 2015, the dispute arose between the parties and thereafter, Peace Committee Meeting was conducted and as per the resolution of the Peace Committee, both groups have to conduct the Temple festival in a peaceful manner. From 2017 up to 2024, no any representation was sent by the petitioner and no any other steps have been taken by the petitioner. But the petitioner sent a representation, dated 4/7

28.11.2024 to the respondents by alleging that Arumugam and three other villagers would not permit the petitioner to take part in the Temple festival on January 19, 20 and 21. But in order to substantiate that contention, no any records produced by the petitioner. Even according to the petitioner, the said Arumugam and three other villagers, were allowed the petitioner to take part in the Temple festival. While so, those three other villagers are not parties to this petition. Moreover, the fifth respondent also assured that without admitting the allegations levelled against the fifth respondent, in future he will never restrain the petitioner from participating the Temple festival and as per the Government officials, there was no any excommunication as alleged by the petitioner.

8. Recording the above submissions, it is appropriate to dispose of the writ petition that there is no any excommunication as per the contentions of the respondents and no any documents to substantiate the contention of the petitioner. However, if any unlawful activities done by anybody, it is for the petitioner to approach the officials concerned for taking appropriate action in the manner known to law. If any such application is filed, the official respondents are directed to take appropriate action on merits and in accordance with law.

5/7

9. With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

06.02.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes BTR To 1.The District Collector, Thirunelveli.

2.The Tahsildar, Ambasamudhram.

3.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli.

4.The Inspector of Police, Ambasamudram Police Station, Ambasamudram.

6/7

P.DHANABAL, J.

BTR 06.02.2025 7/7