The Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari and mandamus to participate in temple festival proceedings. The court held that since the petitioner had not obtained the certified copy of the grounds for the impugned order as promised by the respondents, the matter could not be entertained on merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P. (MD) No. 322 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 12.01.2023
C O R A M
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
W.P. (MD) No. 322 of 2023 and
W.M.P. (MD) Nos. 318, 319 and 321 of 2023
A.Palanivel
... Petitioner
Vs.
Nungambakkam, Chennai.
5.R.Gunasekaran ... Respondents
1/5
W.P. (MD) No. 322 of 2023
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned orders of the 1st respondent in A.P.21/2017 (D2) dated 17.02.2020 and the 2nd respondent in OA No.06/2006 dated 14.10.2016 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to allow the petitioner Kurumbar Community people to participate in the Third day of Mandagapadi in Arulmigu Kottai Mariyamman Temple at Dindigul which is scheduled in the month of February 2023.
For Petitioner : Mr. S.Ramasundarvijayraj For Respondents : Mr. T.Villavankothai Additional Government Pleader (R1 & R2) Mr. VR.Shanmuganathan (R3 & R4) Mr. S.Madhavan (R5)
O R D E R
Heard Mr. S.Ramasundarvijayraj, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. T.Villavankothai, Learned Additional Government Pleader for the First and Second Respondents, Mr. VR.Shanmuganathan, Learned Counsel for the Third and Fourth Respondents and Mr. S.Madhavan, Learned Counsel for the Fifth Respondent and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the
2/5
W.P. (MD) No. 322 of 2023
pleadings of the parties.
Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the First Respondent, on instructions, states that the Petitioner has not applied for certified copy of the annexure containing the grounds till date.
3/5
W.P. (MD) No. 322 of 2023
Court on the merit of the controversy involved in the matter.
In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed with the aforesaid observations. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
No costs.
12.01.2023
Sm
NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No
Note: Issue order copy by 30.01.2023.
To
4.The Hereditary Trustees, Arulmigu Kottai Mariyamman Thirukovil, Dindigul .
4/5
W.P. (MD) No. 322 of 2023
P.D.AUDIKESAVALU,J.
Sm
W.P. (MD) No. 322 of 2023
12.01.2023
5/5
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can entertain a writ petition challenging an order from which the grounds are not yet available.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
A. Palanivel
The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Administrative Department
The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department
The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Kottai Mariyamman Thirukovil
The Hereditary Trustees, Arulmigu Kottai Mariyamman Thirukovil
R. Gunasekaran
P.D.Audikesavalu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
