← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/31573/2024disposed of

Ayyavu v. The District Collector

2024-12-27Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :27.12.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL W.P(MD)No.31573 of 2024 Ayyavu ... Petitioner -Vs1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar, Melur Taluk, Madurai District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, Madurai District.

4.Ponnanai ... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to grant permission for conducting the Arulmighu Shri Kaliamman Temple festival scheduled to be held from 31.12.2024 to 07.01.2025 at Vellanathanpatti Village, Melur Taluk, Madurai District, by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 17.12.2024 and pass such 1/5

further or other orders as this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Vadivel For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.C.Satheesh Government Advocate For R-3 : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor For R-4 : Mr.M.Ponniah

ORDER

The present petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to grant permission for conducting the Arulmighu Shri Kaliamman Temple festival scheduled to be held from 31.12.2024 to 07.01.2025 at Vellanathanpatti Village, Melur Taluk, Madurai District, by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 17.12.2024.

2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that already the petitioner gave a representation, dated 17.12.2024 before the 2/5

third respondent to grant permission for conducting the festival but they have not considered the representation. Therefore, he filed the present writ petition.

4. The learned Counsel appearing for the fourth respondent would submit that he has no grievance if the festival is conducted by Vellanathanpatti people and the petitioner also can participate in the Temple festival along with Vellanathanpatti people. He never objected to conduct the festival by Vellanathanpatti people.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the third respondent would submit that already the matter was referred to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur and the same is pending. However, there are three groups claiming to conduct festival. Thereby unable to give permission to the petitioner. Since the fourth respondent has no objection to conduct festival by Vellanathanpatti people including the petitioner along with Vellanathanpatti people, it is for the respondents 1 to 3 to give permission for the festival as indicated above. The petitioner has to record the video recording of the festival through police / third respondent and the 3/5

entire expense has to bear by the petitioner. The third respondent is at liberty to take action if any other breach of law during the festival by any of the parties, in accordance with law.

6. With the above observation, this writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

27.12.2024 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No BTR To 1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2.The Tahsildar, Melur Taluk, Madurai District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, Madurai District.

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai.

4/5

P.DHANABAL, J.

BTR W.P(MD)No.31573 of 2024 27.12.2024 5/5