Periyasamy v. The Dist.Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.03.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN W.P(MD) No.6590 of 2021 and WMP(MD) No.5108 of 2021 Periyasamy, President, Sivanandhapuram Street Saliyar Uravinmurai, Thirunagaram, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.

.. Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

2.The Thasildar, Taluk Office, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.

4.P.Shanmuga Ganapathy, Aruppukkottai, Puliyampatti, Thirunagaram - Saliyar Mahajan Paribalana Sabai, 22, Sivan Vinayagar Kovil Street, Puliyampatti, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.

.. Respondents PRAYER:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the second respondent not to interfere in the administration, maintenance and also everyday poojas of the Kethu Amsa Sithi Vinayagar Kovil situated at Survey No.33 & 35, Sivanandhapuram Street, Thirunagarm, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District, done by the street people of Sivanadhapuram Street, Thirunagaram, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.

1/3

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Murugappan For Respondents : Mr.M.Thilagar, Government Advocate

O R D E R

The petitioner claims himself to be a President of Sivanandhapuram Street Saliyar Uravinmurai and according to him, Kethu Amsa Sithi Vinayagar Temple, situated in Survey Nos.33 & 35, was constructed in the street, where the petitioner is residing, has been administered and maintained by the local residents of the street and everyday poojas and rituals have been performed by them. 2.According to the petitioner, the fourth respondent has instigated the respondents 2 & 3 and the second respondent is interfering with the administration, maintenance of the day-to-day affairs of the temple. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court, seeking to restrain the second respondent from interfering with the administration of the temple.

3.Heard the learned counsel on either side.

4. This Court is unable to appreciate as to what is the right of the petitioner for maintaining and administering the temple in the first place. What is his locus standi to claim exclusive right etc., is not explained at all in the affidavit. The entire affidavit seems to be bereft of basic details as to the right of the petitioner against the fourth respondent. The claim and averments made in the affidavit are bald and sketchy, based on which, a Mandamus cannot be issued by this Court. Even otherwise, the petitioner has not explained in his affidavit as to what is the nature of the interference the petitioner has been facing from the second respondent. In fact, this Court also finds that the subject Sangam is not registered and whether it can maintain this Writ Petition at all?

5.In view of the above, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ( P AND A ) TRUE COPY /5/2021 SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ( CS ) vrn 2/3

To 1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

2.The Thasildar, Taluk Office, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.

4.P.Shanmuga Ganapathy, Aruppukkottai, Puliyampatti, Thirunagaram - Saliyar Mahajan Paribalana Sabai, 22, Sivan Vinayagar Kovil Street, Puliyampatti, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.

1CC TO THE SPL GOVT PLEADER SR 13625 TR 3/5/2021 3P/6C W.P(MD) No.6590 of 2021 and WMP(MD) No.5108 of 2021 24.03.2021 3/3