Disposed

Nadaraja Murthy v. the District Collector

Madras HC20 Sept 2023WP/27386/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In WP No. 27386 of 2023, the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the demolition of Sakthi Vinayagar Temple for road widening. The Court noted the idol would be relocated with honor, finding no record of authorized construction or immemorial existence, and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of; no order as to costs. A connected W.M.P. was closed.

Nadaraja Murthy Vs the District Collector — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.27386 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 20.09.2023

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

W.P.No.27386 of 2023

Nataraja Moorthi

.. Petitioner

Vs.

The District Collector Office of the District Collector Tirupur District – 641 604.

¶13

The Commissioner Tirupur Corporation Tirupur District – 641 604.

¶14

The Thasildar The Taluk Office Tirupur District – 641 601. .. Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 not to demolish Sri Sakthi Vinayagar Temple, Jothipuram, Kruvampalayam Village, Tirupur District.

¶16

Page 1 of 6

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

W.P.No.27386 of 2023

¶19

For the Petitioner : Mr.A.D.Janarthannan for Mr.J.Gopinath For the Respondents : Mrs.R.Anitha Special Government Pleader for R1 & R3

¶20

Mr.S.Silambanan Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.Abishek Murthy for R2

¶21

ORDER

¶22

(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard Mr.A.D.Janarthannan, learned counsel appearing for

¶23

Mr.J.Gopinath, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs.R.Anitha, learned Special Government Pleader for respondents 1 & 3 and Mr.S.Silambanan, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.Abishek Murthy, learned counsel for respondent 2.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Temple in question is an old Temple and the respondents are trying to demolish the same. The presiding deity of the Temple is Lord Ganesha and for more than hundred years, the Temple is in existence.

¶25

Page 2 of 6

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

W.P.No.27386 of 2023

¶28

Learned Additional Advocate General, on instructions,

¶29

submits that for road widening purpose, the idol would be relocated to a nearby Temple with all its honour.

¶30

There is nothing on record to suggest that the Temple is

¶31

hundred years old. The petitioner claims to be a devotee. The Trustees of the Temple are also not before us.

¶32

Be that as it may, there is no record to show that the Temple

¶33

was constructed authorizedly nor any record is produced to suggest the existence of the Temple from time immemorial. More over, for road widening (public purpose), the Temple is being relocated.

¶34

We record the statement of the learned Additional Advocate

¶35

General that the idol would be relocated to the nearby Temple with all its honour and rituals.

¶36

Page 3 of 6

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

W.P.No.27386 of 2023

¶39

With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶40

There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.No.26833 of 2023 is closed.

¶41

(S.V.G., CJ.) (P.D.A., J.) 20.09.2023 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No

¶42

drm

¶43

Page 4 of 6

¶44

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶45

W.P.No.27386 of 2023

¶46

¶47

The District Collector Office of the District Collector Tirupur District – 641 604.

¶48

The Commissioner Tirupur Corporation Tirupur District – 641 604.

¶49

The Thasildar The Taluk Office Tirupur District – 641 601.

¶50

Page 5 of 6

¶51

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶52

W.P.No.27386 of 2023

¶53

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.

(drm)

W.P.No.27386 of 2023

20.09.2023

Page 6 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Nadaraja Murthy v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nadaraja Murthy 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

Krishnavinayagam Vs The Branch Manager

K.Kalairaja Vs The Principal Secretary to Government

Vaithiyanathan Vs the Secretary

Dr.T.Murugavel Vs The Principal Chief

R R Gopaljee Vs Union of India

K.Kalaiarasi Vs M/S.Zenith Builders P Ltd.