Disposed

Aravan v. the District Collector

Madras HC24 Jan 2022WP(MD)/1032/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court directed a peace committee meeting to resolve a dispute over temple access in Mangalam Pudur Village. The court mandated the petitioner's presence and participation to resolve the issue involving the fifth respondent's worship, disposing of the petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to conduct a peace committee meeting with the petitioner's participation; petitioner may seek to pass a resolution.

Aravan Vs the District Collector — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.1032 of 2022

¶2

Aravan

¶3

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.01.2022 CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN W.P(MD).No.1032 of 2022 and W.M.P(MD)No.872 of 2022

¶5

...Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

1.The District Collector, Trichy, Trichy District.

¶8

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Musiri Taluk, Trichy District.

¶9

3.The Tahsildar, Musiri Taluk, Trichy District.

¶10

4.The Inspector of Police (L & O), Thathaiyangarpettai,

¶11

Trichy District.

¶12

5.Sangapillai. ...Respondents

¶13

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents No.1 to 4 to take appropriate action as against fifth respondent and to unlock public temple namely “MaduraiveeranSwamy temple and Periyakandiyamman PariPala Thevathaikal Thirukovil”, situated in Mangalam Pudur Village, Thulaiyanandamm Post, Musiri Taluk, Trichy District, for the devotees, based on the representation dated 06.12.2021 and consequently direct the second respondent to refer the issue before the HR & CE Department, Trichy, to resolve the issue under Section 49 of Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Suresh

¶15

ORDER

¶16

I will direct the third and fourth respondents to conduct a peace committee meeting once again. Let the petitioner participate in the meeting.

¶17

2.Let me not keep the Writ Petition pending any further on the

¶18

file of this Court.

¶19

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

¶20

1/3

¶21

W.P(MD)No.1032 of 2022

¶22

3.The petitioner seeks a direction to unlock the temples, namely, MaduraiveeranSwamy Temple and Periyakandiyamman Paripala Thevathaikal Thirukovil in Mangalam Pudur Village, Thulaiyanandam Post, Musiri Taluk, Trichy District. The petitioner had given a representation on 06.12.2021.

¶23

4.The petitioner is aggrieved with the participation of the fifth respondent in worshiping in the temple.

¶24

5.It is informed by Mr.S.Shanmugavel, learned Additional Government Pleader that the third respondent/the Tahsildar, Musiri Taluk, Trichy District and the fourth respondent/the Inspector of Police (Law and Order), Thathaiyangarpettai, Trichy District, had conducted a peace committee meeting on 13.01.2022. But, unfortunately, the petitioner has not participated in the said meeting and therefore, a decision could not be taken.

¶25

6.A direction is given to the petitioner that he should participate in the peace committee meeting, put forth his views and his group and thereafter, permit a resolution to be passed.

¶26

7.It must be kept in mind by the petitioner that a temple is a place of worship and whenever the doors of the temples are opened, everybody and any body have every right to worship the deity.

¶27

8.There cannot be a specific time limit given or time period given for that particular purpose. Let the peace committee meeting go ahead and be convened and then, decision be taken. The petitioner and also the fifth respondent may participate in the peace committee meeting.

¶28

9.In view of the nature of the order passed, notice is not directed to the fifth respondent.

¶29

10.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed.

¶30

// True Copy //

¶31

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶32

¶33

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

¶34

2/3

¶35

W.P(MD)No.1032 of 2022

¶36

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶37

To 1.The District Collector, Trichy, Trichy District. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Musiri Taluk, Trichy District. 3.The Tahsildar, Musiri Taluk, Trichy District. 4.The Inspector of Police (L & O), Thathaiyangarpettai, Trichy District.

¶38

+1 CC to M/s.J.JEYAKUMARAN, Advocate ( SR-2290[F] dated 25/01/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-2371[F] dated 25/01/2022 )

¶39

W.P(MD).No.1032 of 2022 24.01.2022

¶40

nsn(CO) TR(02.02.2022) 3P 7C

¶41

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

¶42

3/3

Aravan v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aravan 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

Sornam.M Vs the Union of India Represented by Its

Bose K Vs the Tahsildhar

Seethaiammal Vs the District Collector

Ramson Farm Thro Its Partners Vs the District Revenue Officer

Sundarammal S Vs the District Collector

Saraswathy Vs the District Collector