Mathavi v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 09.10.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Mathavi ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Departments, Sivagangai District.
3.The Fit Person Cum Thakkar, Arulmigu Anuchakudi Sree Kaliyamman Thirukovil, Anuchakudi, Ariyankottai, R.S. Mangalam Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.
4.The Inspector of Police, R.S. Mangalam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
...Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.0144/D5PS RSM/2024 dated 02.10.2024 passed by the 4th respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct to the 4th respondent to grant permission to conduct 1/6
"Thiruvillakku Poojai" which will be held on 12.10.2024 at Arulmigu Sree Anuchakudi Kaliyamman Thirukovil at Anuchakudi Village, Ariyankottai R.S. Mangalam Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Dinesh For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.A.Kannan Additional Government Pleader For R-4 : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
The present Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned order passed by the fourth respondent dated 02.10.2024 and consequently, direct the fourth respondent to grant permission to conduct "Thiruvillakku Poojai" to be held on 12.10.2024 at Arulmigu Sree Anuchakudi Kaliyamman Thirukovil at Anuchakudi Village, Ariyankottai R.S. Mangalam Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is holding the post of State Secretary of Women Wing of Hindu Makkal Nala Iyakkam. It is submitted that the women in the Village used to celebrate a festival including Thiruvillaku Pooja in Arulmigu Sree Anuchakudi Kaliyamman Thirukovil during Navarathri and Vijayathasmi days and the said 2/6
festival is scheduled to be conducted this year on 12.10.2024 at 5.00 PM. Hence, the petitioner submitted a representation to the third respondent on 01.10.2024 seeking permission to conduct the said festival. However, the same was rejected by the third respondent vide impugned order dated 02.10.2024. Aggrieved over the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed.
3. Mr.A.Kannan, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the first and second respondents. Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, takes notice for the fourth respondent.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner's representation was rejected by the third respondent on the ground that without the consent or permission of the trustee and other officers, who are managing the said temple, the petitioner is trying to conduct a festival in the temple, which is not permissible. It has also been recorded in the impugned order that there are rivalry between two groups in celebrating the temple festival and thereby, there is a law and order problem.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the administrators of the temple have already given oral permission and they have only directed the petitioner to get permission from the third respondent for conducting the said festival.
3/6
6. I have carefully gone through the impugned order. Admittedly, no consent or permission letter of the trustees of the temple or the persons managing the temple, have been produced before this Court. The petitioner is one of the worshippers of the temple and a third party, who wants to celebrate the festival without involving the persons, who are managing the temple. Allowing the private parties to conduct temple festivals by bypassing the persons involved in the temple management would cause inconvenience to the devotees, who are attending the temple as per the regular schedule prescribed by the temple management. In this case, no permission or consent of the temple management has been obtained for conducting the said festival and on that ground, the fourth respondent has rejected the representation of the petitioner and thereby, I am not inclined to interfere with the said order.
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
09.10.2024 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Lm 4/6
To 1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Departments, Sivagangai District.
3.The Inspector of Police, R.S. Mangalam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
5/6
K.RAJASEKAR , J.
Lm 09.10.2024 6/6