M.Ravi v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 09.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL W.P(MD) No.10119 of 2025 M.Ravi ... Petitioner vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, Thoothukudi District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Kurumbur Police Station, Thoothukudi.
3.Jawahar ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to give adequate police protection for conducting the temple festival and Poojas of Karumpuli Sastha Kovil, situated at Puraiyur Village, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi District, will be held on 11.04.2025, based on the petitioner's representation, dated 04.04.2025. For petitioner :Mr.S.M.Mohan Gandhi For R1 & R2 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl side) ***** Page No. 1 of 5
O R D E R
This petition is filed by the petitioner to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to give adequate police protection for conducting the temple festival and Poojas of Karumpuli Sastha Kovil, situated at Puraiyur Village, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi District, will be held on 11.04.2025, based on the petitioner's representation, dated 04.04.2025.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the resident of the Puraiyur Village and the villagers used to conduct festival for Karumpuli Sastha Kovil, situated nearby the petitioner's agricultural lands. The petitioner purchased the said property in the year 1997 and the family members decided to renovate the temple. Since the village people are visiting the temple for worshipping, they created a pathway to the villagers on the agricultural fields after getting consent from the adjacent land owners. He also spent more than Rs.15 lakhs for that purpose. The village people are also using the said pathway for going to the temple and worshipping the god. While so, the third respondent, without having any rights, prevented the petitioner to use the said pathway. The petitioner sent a representation dated 04.04.2025 for Page No. 2 of 5
police protection for the temple festival, but the same has not been considered. Therefore, he filed this petition.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl side) for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that the representation of the petitioner is under consideration and they will conduct enquiry. After affording opportunity to the third respondent, they will take appropriate decision in accordance with law.
4. Considering the prayer sought for in this petition, this Court, without issuing notice to the third respondent, is inclined to pass orders.
5. According to the petitioner, the third respondent, without any rights over the property causing disturbances to worship and enter into the field and thereby, he sent a representation dated 04.04.2025, but the same has not been considered. According to the second respondent, they admitted the receipt of the representation of the petitioner and the same is under consideration. Therefore, it is appropriate to direct the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and dispose of the same.
Page No. 3 of 5
6. In view of the same, this Court directs the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and to conduct enquiry by affording opportunity to both the parties and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of two days from the date of this order.
7. With the above said directions and observations, this Writ Petition is allowed.
09.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Thoothukudi District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Kurumbur Police Station, Thoothukudi.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
Page No. 4 of 5
P.DHANABAL,J apd W.P.(MD) No.10119 of 2025 09.04.2025 Page No. 5 of 5