Disposed

Gopal, v. the District Collector

Madras HC3 Sept 2014WP(MD)/13537/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus for permission to conduct a temple festival. The High Court directed the Tahsildar to convene a peace committee within three weeks, including the petitioner and fifth respondent, to work out an amicable settlement before deciding on the festival.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Tahsildar to convene a peace committee within three weeks for amicable settlement of the issue.

Gopal, Vs the District Collector — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 03.09.2014

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶6

W.P(MD)No.13537 of 2014

¶7

Gopal ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs. 1. The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Devakottai, Sivagangai District. 3. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Thiruppathur Sivagangai District. 4. The Inspector of Police, Thirupathur Police Station, Sivagangai District. 5. Ganasekaran ... Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to grant permission to the petitioner's community temple festival for conducting Kida Vettu Adi Padaippu on 16.08.2014 or any other subsequent date in Ezhachi Kaaliamman Temple at Ranasingapuram, Thiruppathur Taluk, Sivagangai District.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kameswaran For respondents : Mr.V.Pandi Government Advocate

¶10

ORDER

¶11

Mr.V.Pandi, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ respondents.

¶12

¶13

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

¶14

This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to consider the respondents to grant permission to the petitioner's community temple festival for conducting Kida Vettu Adi Padaippu on 16.08.2014 or any other subsequent date in Ezhachi Kaaliamman Temple at Ranasingapuram, Thiruppathur Taluk, Sivagangai District.

¶15

This Court by order dated 18.08.2014, notice was issued to the respondents including the 5^th respondent and permitted private also notice to the 5^th respondent. The private notice sent to the 5^th respondent has been returned with an endorsement 'refused'.

¶16

The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that the Tahsildar is scheduled to convene a peace committee meeting shortly and an attempt will be made to resolve the issue.

¶17

In the light of the above submission, there will be a direction to the Tahsildar to convene a peace committee meeting, in which the petitioner and the 5^th respondent and other persons, who are interested should be directed to participate and third respondent shall try to work out an amicable settlement in the matter for the purpose of conduct of the festival. Such peace committee meeting shall be conducted within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶18

The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶19

Sd/Assistant Registrar(T & P)

¶20

/True Copy/

¶21

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶22

¶23

The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶24

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Devakottai, Sivagangai District.

¶25

The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Thiruppathur Sivagangai District.

¶26

The Inspector of Police, Thirupathur Police Station, Sivagangai District.

¶27

+1cc to Mr.S.Kameswaran, Advocate, in SR. No.49528.

¶28

W.P(MD)No.13537 of 2014 03.09.2014

¶29

¶30

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ msm 17.09.2014 p2/6c

Gopal, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopal, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Vigneshwaran, Vs the Branch Manager

M. Veetayan, Vs the Inspector General of

P.Muthurakku, Vs the Chief Secretary

Tmt.S. Kasthuri, Vs the Senior Divisional Retail

Kasi Reddiyar Vs the Panchayat President

P.K.Murugesan, Vs the Thasildar