A.Jacob Sahariah v. R.Alagumeena

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN AND THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR Cont.P (MD). No.2647 of 2025 A.Jacob Sahariah ... Petitioner Vs

1. R.Alagumeena The District Collector Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District 2.Gayathri The Executive Officer, Kumarapuram Town Panchayat, Kanyakumari District ... Respondents PRAYER :- Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to take Contempt proceedings against the contemnors/respondents 1 and 2 for non obedience of the order passed by this Court in WA(MD) No.694 of 2020 dated 29.01.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy Senior counsel for Mr.C.Prithviraj For Respondents : Mr.SRA.Ramachandran Additional Government Pleader 1/6

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.) The contempt petition has been filed complaining that the order of the first respondent dated 02.06.2025 in Pa.Mu.C3/24589/2020 apparently in compliance of the directions issued by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WA(MD) No.694/2020 vide judgment dated 29.01.2025, was in flagrant violation of the directions issued by the Coordinate Bench.

2. The Division Bench had issued a series of directions and very specifically had permitted the petitioner herein to construct a bible study centre, if the proposed construction is otherwise in order, as required under Rule 4 (3) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Building Rules, 1997. It had also been stated that the Division Bench had also examined the undertaking given by the petitioner that he will not put up any electronic display board and loudspeakers outside the building. Taking note of these factors, the writ petition in WA(MD) No.694/2020 was allowed and the relief sought by the petitioner herein was granted. Thereafter, the 2/6

first respondent was directed to pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the undertaking. The order of the first respondent, however, had been passed taking into consideration various other extraneous materials and finally, the first respondent had rejected the representation given by the petitioner for granting of license for construction of Bible study centre. Complaining that this order amounted to contempt of the order of the Division Bench, the present petition has been filed.

3. During the hearing of the contempt petition, we had sought for a further affidavit from the petitioner herein giving undertaking in specific terms about what actually the petitioner would be putting the building to use and to what it would not be put to use. Accordingly a further affidavit has been filed dated 18.11.2025 and we would extract Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the said affidavit.

"I respectfully submit that the proposed Bible Study Centre is intended to provide a peaceful and academic environment for learning and understanding the Holy Bible. Its primary object is educational and cultural, enabling individuals to gain knowledge of 3/6

Biblical literature through structured and scholarly activities. The Centre will conduct Bible reading sessions, study classes, seminars, workshops, and research discussions relating to the history, culture, language, and philosophy of the Scriptures. It may also facilitate academic research, publication of study materials, and leadership training for moral and community service purposes. The Centre's focus is on education, research, and cultural understanding, not on religious worship or prayer. No form of prayer, worship, or religious ceremony will be conducted in the premises. The building shall function only as a reading and study facility to promote academic and ethical learning drawn from Biblical studies.

5. I respectfully submit that I further undertake that the said premises will not be used for any congregational or religious assembly, nor will there be any form of public address, singing, or worship activity. I undertake that the building will remain a private reading and study facility for personal or small-group scriptural reading without any prayer session or public gathering. I also undertake that in case of any violation of this undertaking, I shall be liable for appropriate action, and the authorities shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law,"

4/6

4. In view of the categorical undertaking given by the petitioner herein, the order of the first respondent dated 02.06.2025 is hereby set aside and we direct the first respondent to issue a fresh order keeping in mind all the directions issued by the Coordinate Bench and also the undertaking given by the petitioner in the affidavit dated 18.11.2025. Necessary orders to be passed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. Accordingly, the contempt petition stands closed. [C.V.K,J] [R.V,J] 18.11.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No RR 5/6

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN J.

AND R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.

RR

ORDER

IN Cont. P (MD) No.2647 of 2025 Date : 18.11.2025 6/6