Palsamy Poosari v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.11.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Palsamy Poosari, S/o.Muthu ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, District Collectorate, 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul Division, 3.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

4.The Thasildhar, Nilakottai Taluk, 5.The Inspector of Police, Vilampatti Police Station, ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to 1/6

grant permission to open the temple namely, Arulmigu Sri Elaikathamman, Sri Valladiyar Swamy Thirukovil, by performing lighting Kuthuvilaku and for worshiping deity at Nattarpatti Village, Nilakottai Taluk, Dindigul District, by considering the representation dated 21.10.2024.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Aravindraj For R1, R2 and R4 : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam Government Advocate For R3 and R5 : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to grant permission to open the temple namely, Arulmigu Sri Elaikathamman, Sri Valladiyar Swamy Thirukovil, by performing lighting Kuthuvilaku and for worshiping deity at Nattarpatti Village, Nilakottai Taluk, Dindigul District, by considering the representation dated 21.10.2024.

2/6

2. The petitioner sent a representation on 21.10.2024, claiming that the Poojas at the Village Temple could not be properly conducted, and the lighting of the lamp was not being carried out. Whenever the petitioner's group attempted to open the temple, the rival parties obstructed them and threatened the petitioner's group with deadly weapons. Therefore, the temple has remained closed, and no Pooja has been conducted. The petitioner subsequently sent a representation on 21.10.2024 to the Police officials, but no action has been taken so far. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to grant permission to open the temple and allow worship of the deity.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that, prior to the petitioner's representation, three peace committee meetings had been conducted on 19.06.2024, 10.07.2024, and 23.08.2024 between the two groups, 'A' Party, headed by Rajamani, and 'B' Party, headed by Malaisamy. However, no consensus could be reached in the three meetings, and due to the apprehension of a law and order problem, the peace committee meetings could not proceed further. The petitioner's 3/6

representation will be considered, and appropriate action will be taken by respondents 4 and 5.

4. Recording the above submissions, this writ petition is disposed of. The respondents 4 and 5 are directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 21.10.2024 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with the law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and all other necessary parties, at the earliest. No costs.

29.11.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No smn2 To 1.The District Collector, District Collectorate, 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul Division, 4/6

3.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

4.The Thasildhar, Nilakottai Taluk, 5.The Inspector of Police, Vilampatti Police Station, 6.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

smn2 Order made in Dated: 29.11.2024 6/6