Ummul Hajara v. The District Collector,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.02.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Ummul Hajara ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Ramanathapuram.
3.The Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram.
4.The Inspector of Police, Uchipuli Police Station, Ramanathapuram.
5.Rasheed Khan 6.Ibrahim 7.Saleem 8.Naseer 9.Rasmin 1/6
10.Sali 11.Roovaith 12.Hakkim ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 herein to take appropriate action against the respondents 5 to 12 for illegally ex-communicating (Ooru Vilakkam) petitioner and petitioner's family members from the local community and religious activities based on petitioner's representation dated 18.08.2025 and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to ensure the safety, dignity and social inclusion of my family.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Arun For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.S.Shanmugavel, Additional Government Pleader For Respondent No.4 : Mr.A.Albert James Government Advocate [Crl. Side]
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to direct the respondents 1 to 4 herein to take appropriate action against the 2/6
respondents 5 to 12 for illegally ex-communicating (Ooru Vilakkam) the petitioner and petitioner's family members from the local community and religious activities based on petitioner's representation dated 18.08.2025 and for a consequential direction to the respondents 1 to 4 to ensure the safety, dignity and social inclusion of the petitioner's family.
2.By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
3.Since no adverse orders are passed in this Writ Petition, notice to the private respondents 5 to 12 is dispensed with. 4.When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the fourth respondent has conducted enquiry and the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and a report has been filed. Such being the case, the petitioner's grievance has already been addressed. If at all any other grievance is not addressed, the petitioner shall challenge the report in accordance with law. Hence, no further orders are required. 3/6
5.However, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in the present case, enquiry report has concluded as if inviting to functions is a private affair, however, the petitioner is in agreement with the said report. With regard to the allegation of not allowing the petitioner's family for Friday prayers and other prayers conducted in the mosque, it is made clear that at any cost, the petitioner shall not be prevented by the respondents 5 & 6 from attending the Friday prayers or any other prayers conducted by the temple / mosque etc,. This shall be strictly complied by the temple authorities.
6.Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
16.02.2026 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No MR 4/6
To 1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Ramanathapuram.
3.The Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram.
4.The Inspector of Police, Uchipuli Police Station, Ramanathapuram.
5/6
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
MR 16.02.2026 6/6