Mailal v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 21.03.2025 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Mailal ... Petitioner Vs
1. The District Collector, The District Collectors Office, Thoothukudi.
2. The Tahsildar, Thiruchendur.
3. The State Represented by TheSuperintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Thoothukudi District.
4. The State, Represented by The Inspector of Police, Meignanapuram Police Station, Thoothukudi District.
5. Patturaja ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1 to 4 1/7
respondents to conduct enquiry and allow the petitioner to participate in Muneeshwaran Temple festival in petitioner Marudhurkar Village, to be held on 21-03-2025 and direct the 5th respondent to accept donation from the petitioner, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 17.03.2025.
For Petitioner : Mr.S. Ramasamy For R1and R2 : Mr.M.Senthil Ayyanar Government Advocate For R2 and R4 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the 1 to 4 respondents to conduct enquiry and allow the petitioner to participate in Muneeshwaran Temple festival at Marudhurkar Village, which is scheduled to be held on 21.03.2025 and direct the fifth respondent to accept donation from the petitioner, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 17.03.2025.
2/7
2.According to the petitioner, she is one of the villagers and devotees of the Muneeshwaran temple. Every year the villagers used to conduct festival in the said temple. Likewise, they fixed the date of festival on 21.03.2025. While so, without any reasons, the fifth respondent excommunicated the petitioner and refused to receive donation and also restrained the petitioner from worshiping the temple and from participating in the festival. Therefore, the petitioner sent the representation dated 17.03.2025, but the same has not been considered. Hence this petition.
3.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that based on the petitioner's representation, they have conducted enquiry. On enquiry, it is found that son of the petitioner, namely, Manikandan had liquor in the temple premises and the same was warned by the villagers and no any excommunication was there as alleged by the petitioner. The villagers have no any objection for the petitioner to participate in the festival. Only because of the warning made by the villagers for having liquor in the temple premises, the petitioner sent the representation without any 3/7
basis. Therefore, this petition is liable to be dismissed. 4.Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for in this petition, this Court, without even issuing notice to the private respondent, is inclined to pass order.
5.According to the petitioner, the fifth respondent excommunicated her and not allowed to participate in the said temple festival. Therefore, she sent the representation, dated 17.03.2025 but the same has not considered. According to the first and second respondents, they have considered the said representation and conducted an enquiry. On enquiry it is found that no any excommunication was done by the villagers and the petitioner's son had alcohol inside the temple premises and the same was warned and the same was misunderstood by the petitioner and others.
6.Recording the above said submission, this writ petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to participate in the said temple festival and the fourth respondent shall also ensure that nobody restricts the petitioner from worshiping the said temple.
4/7
7.At this juncture, the learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is willing to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- as festival contribution to the said temple and the same has to be accepted by the fifth respondent.
8.In view of the above, the petitioner is permitted to pay the said amount to the fifth respondent through the fourth respondent. The fifth respondent, without prejudice to the rights shall receive the said amount. 21.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No LR 5/7
To
1. The District Collector, The District Collectors Office, Thoothukudi.
2. The Tahsildar, Thiruchendur.
3. The State Represented by The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Thoothukudi District.
4. The State, Represented by The Inspector of Police, Meignanapuram Police Station, Thoothukudi District.
5.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
P.DHANABAL , J.
LR 21.03.2025 7/7