Partly allowed

M.S.Ramachandran v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC6 Apr 2017WP(MD)/5953/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench disposed of concurrent writ petitions seeking directions for the peaceful conduct of the Pongal Festival at a specific temple in Pudukottai. The bench quashed the original committee order and directed the authorities to conduct the festival on 08.04.2017 without granting 'First Respect' or special honours to any party.

What did the court decide?

Direction to conduct the Pongal Festival on 08.04.2017 without 'First Respect'; quashing of the impugned order dated 01.04.2017; closure of connected miscellaneous petitions.

M.S.Ramachandran Vs the Revenue… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 06.04.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN

¶6

W.P(MD)Nos.5953 and 6089 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD) No.4692 of 2017 in W.P.(MD) No.5953 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.4795 and 4796 of 2017 in W.P.(MD) No.6089 of 2017

¶7

M.S.Ramachandran ..Petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.5953 of 2017 C.Palanivel ..Petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.6089 of 2017

¶8

¶9

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Iluppur Division, Pudukottai District. 2.The Tahsildar, Ponnamaravathi Taluk, Ponnamaravathi, Pudukottai District. 3.P.L.Subbaiah ..Respondents in both petitions

¶10

Prayer in W.P.(MD) No.5953 of 2017 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent to ensure and to ascertain that the Pongal Festival of Arulmigu Sri Maha Ezhuvakka Nachiamman Temple, Kandeduthanpatti, Pudukottai scheduled to be celebrated on 08.04.2017 will be conducted in a smooth and peaceful manner by all the villagers jointly without claiming any right of Ambalam on Honour or first respect by anybody on the basis of the order passed by the 1^st respondent on 01.04.2017.

¶11

Prayer in W.P.(MD) No.6089 of 2017 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned peace committee order dated 01.04.2017 passed by the 1^st respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 1^st respondent to conduct a fresh peace Committee meeting after affording proper opportunity to all parties who were parties to the original 2^nd respondent proceedings in peace committee dated 30.03.2017 in Na.Ka.No.1708/2017/A3.

¶12

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

¶13

For Petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.5953 of 2017 :Mr.Babu Rajendran

¶14

¶15

For Petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.6089 of 2017 :Mr.AN.Ramanathan

¶16

For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.K.Mahesh Raja in both petitions Government Advocate

¶17

COMMON ORDER

¶18

The Petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.5953 of 2017 has approached this Court seeking a direction to the 1^st respondent to ensure and to ascertain that the Pongal Festival of Arulmigu Sri Maha Ezhuvakka Nachiamman Temple, Kandeduthanpatti, Pudukottai scheduled to be celebrated on 08.04.2017 will be conducted in a smooth and peaceful manner by all the villagers jointly without claiming any right of Ambalam on Honour or first respect by anybody on the basis of the order passed by the 1^st respondent on 01.04.2017.

¶19

2.The Petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.6089 of 2017 has approached this Court seeking quashment of the impugned peace committee order dated 01.04.2017 passed by the 1^st respondent and consequently to direct the 1^st respondent to conduct a fresh peace Committee meeting after affording proper opportunity to all parties who were parties to the original 2^nd respondent proceedings in peace committee dated 30.03.2017 in Na.Ka.No.1708/2017/A3.

¶20

3.Since both the writ petitions are in relation to the conduct of Pongal Festival of Arulmigu Sri Maha Ezhuvakka Nachiamman Temple, Kandeduthanpatti, Pudukottai, they are taken up together for disposal.

¶21

4.According to the petitioners, the Pongal Festival in relation to Arulmigu Sri Maha Ezhuvakka Nachiamman Temple, Kandeduthanpatti, Pudukottai is to be conducted on 08.04.2017 and in the temple festival there is a difference of opinion between the petitioners and the third respondent as to who should get the “First Respect” and other Honours during the festival. In order to arrive at a settlement between the rival claimants, it appears a Peace Committee Meeting was held by the official respondents in which the rival claims have been considered on 30.03.2017 and 01.04.2017. In the Peace Committee Meeting it has been resolved that the temple festival will be conducted without any privileges to either of the contesting parties.

¶22

5.I have heard the learned counsels appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 in both petitions.

¶23

6.According to the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, a decision has been taken to conduct the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Pongal Festival of Arulmigu Sri Maha Ezhuvakka Nachiamman Temple, Kandeduthanpatti, Pudukottai without giving any “First Respect” to either of the claimants and such festival will be conducted as in

¶24

¶25

the past since 2014 and the same will be continued in this year also. According to the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, this was the decision taken in the Peace Committee Meeting and the same will be implemented.

¶26

7.Recording the submissions made on behalf of the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, these Writ Petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to conduct the Pongal Festival of Arulmigu Sri Maha Ezhuvakka Nachiamman Temple, Kandeduthanpatti, Pudukottai without giving special honours i.e., “First Respect” or any other form of Honour to any of the parties to either of the claimants. The respondents 1 and 2 should also ensure that the Pongal Festival of Arulmigu Sri Maha Ezhuvakka Nachiamman Temple, Kandeduthanpatti, Pudukottai is conducted peacefully without any untoward incident by any of the parties. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

Assistant Registrar(AD-II)

¶29

/True Copy/

¶30

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶31

¶32

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Iluppur Division, Pudukottai District.

¶33

2.The Tahsildar, Ponnamaravathi Taluk, Ponnamaravathi, Pudukottai District.

¶34

+1 CC TO MR.AN.RAMANATHAN,ADVOCATE,SR NO.50588

¶35

+1 CC TO MR.BABU RAJENDERAN,ADVOCATE,SR NO.50589

¶36

+1 cc to Special Government Pleader SR.No.50988

¶37

¶38

MAS/RR/SAR3:05.04.2017:3P-6C

¶39

W.P(MD)Nos.5953 and 6089 of

¶40

2017

¶41

and W.M.P.(MD) No.4692 of 2017 in W.P.(MD) No.5953 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.4795 and 4796 of 2017 in W.P.(MD)o.6089 of 2017

¶42

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

¶43

Delivered on 06.04.2017

M.S.Ramachandran v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.S.Ramachandran v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

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

S. Ramasamy, Vs State Rep. by

H.A. Sudhakar Vs the Joint Commissioner

K.Sarath Kumar, Vs the Manager

C.Isac Sobanaraj, Vs the Govt. of Tamilnadu

Palanichamy Vs the President

B.Rajendran, Vs the District Collector