P.Karthikeyan v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY P.Karthikeyan

...Petitioner

vs.

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thirupparankundram, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram, Madurai.

3.Mahalingam 4.Ganesan 5.Thirumoorthy

...Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents Nos.1 and 2 to unlock the temple namely Karaimurugan Temple situated at Panangulam, Nilaiyur, Thirupparangundram, Madurai and to restrain the respondents Nos.3 to 5 from doing illegal activities in the temple based on the representation dated 15.12.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Ezhilarasu For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasubramani, Special Government Pleader for R1 and R2 1/5

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to unlock the Karaimurugan Temple situated at Panangulam, Nilaiyur, Thirupparangundram, Madurai and to restrain the respondents 3 to 5 from doing illegal activities in the temple based on the representation dated 15.12.2025.

2. Mr.K.Balasubramani, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2. Since no adverse orders are going to be passed against the respondents 3 to 5, notice to them is dispensed with.

3. By consent on either sides, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has given a representation on 15.12.2025 to unlock the Karaimurugan Temple, Panangulam, Nilaiyur, Thirupparangundram, Madurai and to restrain the respondents 3 to 5 from doing illegal activities. However, the same is yet to be considered. Hence, the Writ Petition. 2/5

5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that the representation submitted by the petitioner will be considered within the time stipulated by this Court.

6. It appears that the temple remains locked due to dispute between private individuals. This Court is of the view that dispute between private individuals is not a reason to lock the temple and stop performing poojas. Therefore, the second respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 15.12.2025 and pass orders to unlock the temple and perform poojas, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

02.01.2026 Speaking / Non-speaking order Index : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No mbi 3/5

To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thirupparankundram, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram, Madurai.

4/5

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

mbi 02.01.2026 5/5