Poosari Pinniyakkal v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL and W.M.P(MD) No.5205 of 2025 Poosari Pinniyakkal ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Madurai.
2. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Madurai.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Usilampatti, Madurai District.
4. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Usilampatti, Madurai District.
5. The Inspector of Police, Usilampatti Town Police Station, Usilampatti, Madurai District.
6. Malaiyan @ Vasudevan Page No. 1 of 7
7. Gurunathan
8. Masanan
9. Poongodi
10. Poongodi Pinnathevan
11. Periyabalu @ Pinnathevan
12. Karuppathevar
13. Poosari Kasimayan
14. Vasudevan
15. Sangulakshmi
16. Nagakshmi
17. Valluvathevan
18. Kathiravan ... Respondents PRAYER:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 5 to give police protection to the petitioner to perform her duty as Poosari to the Arulmighu Sri Durgaiamman Thirukovil, near Linganayakkanpatti Village, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District, on the back ground of facing threat from the respondents 6 to 18 herein by considering the representation dated 20.02.2025.
Page No. 2 of 7
For Petitioner : Mr.K.R.Laxman For R-1 to R3 : Mr.M.Senthil Ayyanar Government Advocate For R2, R4 & R5 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side)
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to direct the respondents no.1 to 5 to give police protection to the petitioner to perform her duty as Poosari to the Arulmighu Sri Durgaiamman Thirukovil, near Linganayakkanpatti Village, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District, by considering the representation dated 20.02.2025.
2. According to the petitioner, she is the hereditary Poosari of the Temple, namely, Arulmighu Sri Durgaiamman Thirukovil, near Linganayakkanpatti Village, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District. While so, the private respondents no.6 to 18 have started threatening the petitioner by stating that the petitioner being the women cannot perform as Poojari and the Temple should be handed over to any one of the respondents no. 6 to 18. Thereafter, the Tahsildar has passed an order dated 14.09.2007 as against the petitioner and the same was challenged through W.P.(MD) NO.9704 of 2007 and the same was ended in favour of Page No. 3 of 7
the petitioner. The said order was challenged through W.A.(MD) No.586 of 2008 and the same was also disposed of in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner has also filed a suit in O.S.No.13 of 2007 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Usilampatti in respect of perform as poojari and the same was decreed in her favour, and thereafter, in the appeal A.S.No. 82 of 2011, the same was reversed through decree and judgment. Therefore, the petitioner has filed a petition in Crl.O.P (MD) No.15385 of 2020 for police protection and the same was also disposed of by allowing the petition. As against the decree and judgment of the first appeal, the petitioner is taking steps to file a second appeal. In the mean time, the respondent no. 6 to 18 are taking steps to dispossess the petitioner and thereby, the petitioner sent a representation dated 20.02.2025, but the same has not been considered by the official respondents. Hence this petition.
3. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents no.1 to 3 would submit that already there is a dispute pending between the petitioner and the other private respondents in respect of poogari. Therefore, a civil dispute is also pending between the parties. Page No. 4 of 7
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents no.2, 4 and 5 would submit that the representation of the petitioner dated 20.02.2025 is under consideration and they will conduct an enquiry and dispose of the same within fifteen days.
5. Since the prayer of the petitioner is to consider the representation, this Court even without issuing notice to the private respondent no.6 to 18 inclined to pass orders.
6. The prayer of the petitioner is to consider the representation dated 20.02.2025 for police protection and the same is under consideration by the 5th respondent. Therefore, recording the above said submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this Court directs the 5th respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 20.02.2025 and conduct enquiry and dispose of the same after affording opportunities to both the parties within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of this order.
7. With the above said observations and directions, this writ petition Page No. 5 of 7
is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected writ miscellaneous petition is closed.
17.03.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Mac To
1. The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Madurai.
2. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Madurai.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Usilampatti, Madurai District.
4. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Usilampatti, Madurai District.
5. The Inspector of Police, Usilampatti Town Police Station, Usilampatti, Madurai District.
6. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
Page No. 6 of 7
P.DHANABAL, J.
Mac and W.M.P(MD) No.5205 of 2025 17.03.2025 Page No. 7 of 7