Meena v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN W.P(MD)No.12379 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.9047 and 9049 of 2025 Meena ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

2.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

3.The Tahsildar, Rajapalayam Taluk, 4.The Sub-Inspector of Police, South Police Station, 5.Sivalingam, Father's name not known, President, Rajapalayam Oruvoor Saliyar Uravinmurai, Thoppupatti, Rajapalayam, 1 / 6

6.Arumuga Perumal Father's name not known, President, Rajapalayam Oruvoor Saliyar Uravinmurai, ... Respondents Prayer : This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 3 to 6 to collect tax from the petitioner and her family members to participate in the 9th day Thandiyal Thattu Sapparam festival scheduled to be conducted on 09.05.2025 in Puthupalayam Arulmighu Sri Mariamman Temple by considering the representation dated 10.12.2024. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Leninkumar For R1 to R3 : Mr.G.Suryananth Additional Government Pleader For R4 : Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate

ORDER

The petitioner seeks for the relief of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 3 to 6 to collect tax from the petitioner and her family members to participate in the 9th day Thandiyal Thattu Sapparam festival scheduled to be conducted on 09.05.2025 in Puthupalayam Arulmighu Sri Mariamman Temple by considering the representation dated 10.12.2024. 2 / 6

2. The petitioner belongs to Hindu Maravar community. She married one Udhayakumar who belongs to Saliyar community. On account of the intercaste marriage, the sixth respondent refused to collect thp from the petitioner.

3. According to the petitioner, there is situated a temple in the name and style of Puthupalayam Arulmighu Sri Mariamman Temple in Rajapalayam. Persons belonging to the Maravar community observe a 15 days festival in the said temple. The petitioner states that on account of the intercaste marriage, she has not been permitted inside the temple. Hence this writ petition for the aforesaid relief.

4. I heard Mr.Lenin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.G.Suryananth, learned Additional Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate for the fourth respondent.

5. As no adverse order has been passed against the respondents 5 and 6, notice to them is dispensed with.

6. The petitioner pleads that she has been excluded from offering worship in a public temple on account of her intercaste marriage. She also 3 / 6

requests a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 to ensure that respondents 5 and 6 collect temple thp from her.

7. Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate produced written instructions from the fourth respondent pointing out that the sixth respondent had appeared before the police on the complaint lodged by the petitioner and had given a statement that civil suit is pending in O.S.No. 109/2024 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Rajapalayam and that the parties will workout their right depending on the decree of the civil Court.

8. Whether the petitioner is entitled to pay thp as a right or not has to be decided by the civil Court. It is essentially a civil dispute between the petitioner and the private respondents. In this proceeding, a direction can not be given in a writ petition calling upon the private parties to receive thp from the writ petitioner. With respect to her prayer that she has not been permitted to participate in the festival in a public temple, the respondents owe out to ensure such an exclusion does not took place.

9. Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate states that concern authority will ensure that the petitioner is not excluded or prevented from participating in the temple festival. That statement is recorded.

4 / 6

10. Leaving it open to the petitioner to workout her civil right before the civil Courts, this writ petition is ordered directing the respondents to ensure that the petitioner is not prevented from offering worship in the temple.

11. This writ petition is ordered. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are dismissed. No costs. 28.04.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No pnn To 1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

3.The Tahsildar, Rajapalayam Taluk, 4.The Sub-Inspector of Police, South Police Station, 5 / 6

V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

pnn W.P(MD)No.12379 of 2025 28.04.2025 6 / 6