Shanmugam Chettiyar v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Shanmugam Chettiyar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.

2.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Tahsildar, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.

4.The Inspector of Police, Parthibanoor 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 Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 3 herein to conduct enquiry and take appropriate action the persons who have demolished Vinayagar Temple in the land comprised in Old Sur. No. 66, Sur.No.66-4 situated at Kallikudi Group, 1/5

Parthibanoor Sub Division, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District and restore the temple on the basis of the representation dated 07.07.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Senthil Murugan For Respondents : Mr.K.S.Selva Ganesan Additional Government Pleader for R.1 to R.3 Mr.A.Albert James Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for R.4

ORDER

Heard both sides.

2.The writ petitioner claims that a Vinayagar Temple was located in the petition mentioned survey number and that the same had been illegally demolished by unknown persons. The petitioner wants the third respondent to conduct an enquiry and take steps for restoring the same. 3.Such a relief cannot be granted. It is seen that the petitioner had earlier filed W.P(MD)No.17287 of 2025 in respect of the land on which the temple was located. The writ petition was dismissed and the 2/5

petitioner was called upon to move the jurisdictional civil Court. The petitioner's apprehension is that, since the temple in question has been demolished, it will be difficult for him to establish his title over the same. Such an apprehension is misplaced.

4.Admittedly, the petitioner has photographic evidence. He has also filed the present writ petition. He has earlier filed complaints before the authorities concerned. These documents coupled with the petitioner's oral evidence can very well help him to establish his claim before the jurisdictional civil Court. The petitioner has to necessarily adopt the course for action for which he was given liberty vide order dated 26.06.2025 in W.P(MD)No.17287 of 2025.

5.This Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. 11.11.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No MGA 3/5

To 1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.

2.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Tahsildar, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.

4.The Inspector of Police, Parthibanoor Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

4/5

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

MGA 11.11.2025 5/5