Disposed

R.Maruthupandi, v. the District Collector

Madras HC7 Jun 2017WP(MD)/10416/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench held the writ petition infructuous after the peace committee for a temple festival was conducted. The Court directed parties to maintain peace and allowed specific petitioners to participate in rituals subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Directing parties to maintain peace; permitting first petitioner to perform rituals; second petitioner restricted from performing rituals during Sami Aaduthal.

R.Maruthupandi, Vs the District Collector — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED 07.06.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶6

W.P(MD)No.10416 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD) No.7959 of 2017

1.R.Maruthupandi

2.Alaguperumal

..Petitioners

1.The District Collector,

¶12

Collectorate Building,

¶13

Madurai District- 625 020.

¶14

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,

¶15

Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer,

¶16

Madurai.

¶17

3.The Tahsildar,

¶18

Tirumangalam Taluk,

¶19

Tirumangalam, Madurai District.

¶20

4.The Inspector of Police,

¶21

Kallikudi Police Station,

¶22

Kallikudi, Madurai District.

¶23

5.Thavamani

¶24

6.Sankaran ..Respondents

¶25

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to conduct the peace Committee Meeting among the 4 Vagiyarahs namely 1) Kudumbanar Vagaiyarah 2) Oorkaval Vagaiyarah, 3) Vedasamy Vagaiyarah and 4) Marathimagan Vagaiyarah in Maruthangudi Village, Madurai District for conducting proposed temple festival to Arulmigu Sri Maruthudaiyar Temple Festival oon 09.06.2017 to 11.06.2017 based on the petitioner's representation dated 19.04.2017.

¶26

For Petitioner :M/s.A.C.Asaithambi

¶27

For Respondents 1-4 :Mr.A.Muthukaruppan https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Additional Government Pleader

¶28

For Respondents 5 & 6:V.Meenakshisundaram

¶29

¶30

ORDER

¶31

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to conduct the peace Committee Meeting among the 4 Vagiyarahs in Maruthangudi Village, Madurai District for conducting proposed temple festival to Arulmigu Sri Maruthudaiyar Temple Festival on 09.06.2017 to 11.06.2017 based on the petitioner's representation dated 19.04.2017.

¶32

By consent of both parties, the main Writ Petition is taken up for disposal.

¶33

The main grievance of the petitioner is that though he belongs to Kudumbanar Vagaiyarah and they have right to perform rituals during Kumbabisekam of Arulmigu Sri Maruthudaiyar Temple, but they were prevented by the respondents 5 and 6 to participate the temple festival.

¶34

4.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 would submit that the peace committee was conducted on 05.06.2017, and hence the Writ Petition has become infructutious.

¶35

5.Mr.Meenakshisundaram, learned counsel for the respondents 5 and 6 submitted that the first petitioner belongs to Kudumbanar Vagaiyarah and he is residing in the Maruthangudi Village and the second petitioner is residing at some other village. Therefore the respondents 5 and 6 have no objection for the first petitioner to participate in the Kumbabisekam festival along with his family members and they would permit to perform rituals. However, the second petitioner can be permitted only worship the temple and he will not be allowed to perform rituals during Sami Aaduthal. The submission of the learned counsel is recorded.

¶36

5.The petitioner and respondents 5 and 6 are directed to maintain peace during the festival and if there is any violation, the respondent police is at liberty to take action as per the law.

¶37

6.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

Assistant Registrar(P&A)

¶40

/True Copy/

¶41

Sub Assistant Registrar.

¶42

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶43

¶44

¶45

1.The District Collector, Collectorate Building, Madurai District- 625 020. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai. 3.The Tahsildar, Tirumangalam Taluk, Tirumangalam, Madurai District. 4.The Inspector of Police, Kallikudi Police Station, Kallikudi, Madurai District. +1CC to M/S.D.Nallathambi, Advocate, SR.No.59018 +1CC to M/S.A.C.Asaithambi, Advocate, SR.No.59114 +1CC to the Special Government Pleader SR.No. 59068

¶46

W.P(MD)No.10416 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD) No.7959 of 2017 07.06.2017

¶47

TA/CP AM/SV/SAR 2/08.06.2017/3P/8C

¶48

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

R.Maruthupandi, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Maruthupandi, 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Gunaseelan S/O Late Seeni Vs the Inspector General of

S.Manokaran, Vs the Tahsildar

V.Shamugapriya Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

M. Blesson Das, Vs the Union of India

The Secretary, Vs the State of Tamilnadu

International Youth Fellowship Vs the Director of Social Defence