Madras High CourtWP(MD)/16931/2024closed

A.Upakaramary v. The District Collector

2024-07-25Honourable Mr Justice B.Pugalendhi6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.07.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and W.M.P.(MD)No.14591 of 2024 B.Upakaramary ... Petitioner versus

1. The District Collector, Office of the District Collector,

2. The Thasildar, Karaikudi,

3. The Inspector of Police, Kallal Police Station,

4. Innasimuthu Ex Village President, Soorampatti, Satharasan Patti (PO), Nadarajapuram (Via), 1/6

5. Raja, Village President, Soorampatti, Satharasan Patti (PO), Nadarajapuram (Via),

6. Arokiyasamy

7. Innsimuthu

8. Thiraviyam

9. Palthasar ... 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 to 3 herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 03.07.2024 initiate inquiry and action as against the respondents 4 to 9 for excommunicating the petitioner for not receiving Oor Vari and Kanduthala Vari in connection with Innasiyar Alayam Church, situated at Soorampatti scheduled to be held on 27.07.2024 - 28.07.2024 within a time frame as fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : M/s.W.Pamelin For R1 and R2 : Mr.P.T.Thiraviam, Government Advocate For R3 : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor 2/6

ORDER

The petitioner, with a grievance that she and her family members have been discriminated in the church festival, has submitted a representation before the District Collector, Sivagangai District and has filed this writ petition for a Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider her representation dated 0.307.2024 and initiate action as against the respondents 4 to 9, for excommunicating them by not receiving Oor Vari and Kanduthala Vari for Innasiyar Aalayam Church.

2. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the 3rd respondent submits that the 3rd respondent Police has not received any representation from the petitioner.

3. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 seeks for a short accommodation to get 3/6

instructions with regard to the representation referred in this writ petition.

4. This Court considered the rival submissions made.

5. The grievance of the petitioner is that she and her family members have not been allowed to participate in the church festival and she has projected the case as that of excommunication.

6. It appears that both the parties belong to the same church. The petitioner has submitted a representation to the District Collector, Sivagangai and the Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangi. The same was already forwarded to the second respondent/the Tahsildar, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District.

7. Therefore, this writ petition petition is closed with a direction to the second respondent/the Tahsildar, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District, 4/6

to look into this issue, conduct an enquiry and ensure that no one is discriminated in the church festival. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

25.07.2024 ogy NCC : Yes / No.

Index : Yes / No.

Internet : Yes / No.

Note: Issue order copy today itself.

1. The District Collector, Office of the District Collector,

2. The Thasildar, Karaikudi,

3. The Inspector of Police, Kallal Police Station, 5/6

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

ogy 25.07.2024 6/6