The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing respondents to consider a representation and conduct a joint car festival for two different temples. The court found the cause of action fictitious as the temples are administered separately and dismissed the petition with exemplary costs.
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.11154 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 08.05.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
W.P.(MD).No.11154 of 2024
P.Vairavel
... Petitioner
Vs-
5.V.Thangavel Pillai 6.N.Rengaraja Pillai 7.P.Sappaniya Pillai 8.K.P.Manoharan
... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to
1/4
W.P.(MD)No.11154 of 2024
consider the petitioner's representation dated 30.04.2024 and pass appropriate orders within a time frame stipulated by this Court and consequently, directing the 4th respondent to conduct the car festival for both the deities.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Venkatesh For R1 to R3 : Mr.M.Siddharthan, Additional Government Pleader For R4 : Dr.C.Gunaseela Ruban For R5 to R8 : Mr.B.Jameel Arasu
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed, seeking for Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 30.04.2024
and pass appropriate orders within a time frame stipulated by this Court and consequently, to direct the 4th respondent to conduct the car festival for both the deities.
2.Mr.M.Siddharthan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes
notice for the respondents 1 to 3, Dr.C.Gunaseela Ruban, learned counsel takes notice for the 4th respondent and Mr.B.Jameel Arasu, learned counsel takes notice for the respondents 5 to 8.
3.By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
2/4
W.P.(MD)No.11154 of 2024
4.It is submitted by the learned counsel for the 4th respondent and the learned counsel for the respondents 5 to 8 that the temple called 'Arulmigu Pattathu Mariamman Temple' at Anandhapuram is under the administration of the 4th respondent and the temple called 'Arulmigu Muthukan Mariamman Temple at Nithyanandhapuram belongs to the private respondents, ie., respondents 5 to 8 and without consultation of either the 4th respondent or the trustees of the private temple, the petitioner has printed the invitation.
5.A perusal of the invitation shows that the festival would be performed for both the temples and the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition for some fictitious cause of action and therefore, the same is not maintainable. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed with exemplary cost of Rs.50,000/(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the credit of High Court Legal Services Authority attached with this Bench on or before 07.06.2024.
6.Post for reporting compliance on 11.06.2024.
08.05.2024
NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No
Yuva
3/4
W.P.(MD)No.11154 of 2024
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
Yuva
To
W.P.(MD)No.11154 of 2024
08.05.2024
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition regarding the conduct of car festival for deities of two different temples is maintainable?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P.Vairavel
The Commissioner, HR & CE Department
The Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department
The Assistant Commissioner, HR & CE Department
The Executive Officer, Sengulathan Kulandayi Amman Temple
V.Thangavel Pillai
P.Velmurugan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
