Madras High CourtWP(MD)/9714/2022dismissed

Gnanasekaran v. The Joint Commissioner

2022-05-11Honourable Mr Justice D. Krishnakumar3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.05.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR and W.M.P.(MD)No.6967 of 2022 Gnanasekaran ... Petitioner versus

1. The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Department, Thanjavur.

2. The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Department, Pudukkottai.

3. The Executive Officer, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Department, Pudukkottai.

4. The Tahsildar, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

5. The Inspector of Police, Aranthangi Police Station, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District.

6. Solai Muthaiah ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to direct the 3rd respondent to conduct the festival of Arulmigu Pulikuthi Amman Temple situate at Sengamari Village, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai District held on 19.05.2022 without conferring any privilege right by way of first respect and Mandagapadi to any individual including the 6th respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Arul Jenifer For R1, R2, R4 and R5 : Mr.M.Siddharthan, Additional Government Pleader For R3 : Mr.G.Madhavan, 1/3

Standing Counsel For R6 : Mr.C.Ezhilarasu

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to conduct the festival of Arulmigu Pulikuthi Amman Temple situate at Sengamari Village, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai District held on 19.05.2022, without conferring any privilege right by way of first respect and Mandagapadi to any individual including the 6th respondent.

2. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the third respondent submits that there is no festival to be conducted on 19.05.2022. Therefore, the relief sought for by the petitioner is unsustainable and the same is liable to be rejected.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the sixth respondent has also taken the same stand that there is no festival to be conducted on the aforesaid date.

4. In view of the said submissions, the prayer sought for by the petitioner has become infructuous. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Vacation Officer (Cs-I) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To