Disposed¶38

K.Sakthi v. the District Collector

Mandamus – Kangaroo Court and excommunication

Madras HC29 Apr 2025WP/15964/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court writ petition (Article 226) disposed on 29.04.2025 by D. Bharatha Chakravarthy J.; keywords: kangaroo court, excommunication, temple entry and worship, temple festival, peace committee, police protection, mandamus, representation dated 17.04.2025, Tiruvallur district, Kumidipoondi Taluk, Medhipalayam Panchayat, Mr.Ellappan group, K.Gopal v. State of Tamil Nadu MANU/TN/0672/2005, extra-constitutional village authorities.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed with directions: respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's representation/issue thereafter; all persons to be ensured access to visit and worship at all temples; police protection to be extended to excommunicated persons on complaints of Kangaroo Courts; no order as to costs. ¶38

K.Sakthi Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶38

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 17.04.2025 and dispose of the same within a stipulated time. +1 more

¶19

Court's answer

The Court declined to intervene at the last minute in the festival scheduled for 30.04.2025, 01.05.2025 and 02.05.2025, but directed that respondents 1 and 2 shall consider the issue thereafter.

¶33

Ratio / Principle

In matters of entry and worship at a temple, no person can be prevented by any village group; ensuring the visiting of all temples by all persons shall be ensured.

¶33

Key takeaways

On any future complaint regarding a Kangaroo Court, the respondents must give police protection to the excommunicated persons; resort to a peace committee is not required on every occasion, particularly as such incidents recur.ratio¶33
Relying on its earlier decision in K.Gopal Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu and Others (MANU/TN/0672/2005), that Kangaroo Courts are unconstitutional and nobody can be excommunicated or subjected to such acts by extra-constitutional village authorities, the Court directed the authority to act bearing this in mind with firm action against illegality.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Mandamus – Kangaroo Court and excommunication – Petitioner sought direction to consider representation dated 17.04.2025 alleging that a Kangaroo Court run by one Mr.Ellappan and others had excommunicated villagers and obstructed their participation in temple festivals. Held: the Court would not intervene at the last minute in the festival fixed for 30.04.2025–02.05.2025, but respondents 1 and 2 (District Collector and Revenue Divisional Officer) shall consider the issue thereafter. Entry and worship at temples cannot be prevented by any village group; visiting of all temples by all persons shall be ensured. On future complaints of Kangaroo Courts, police protection must be given to excommunicated persons without insisting on a peace committee each time. Reliance placed on K.Gopal Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu and Others, MANU/TN/0672/2005, holding Kangaroo Courts unconstitutional and excommunication impermissible; authorities to act with firmness against illegality. Writ petition disposed, no costs (D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.).

¶1

W.P.No.15964 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED :29.04.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

Writ Petition No.15964 of 2025

¶7

K.Sakthi, S/o.Late Kannapa Chtty, Valam Pedu Kuppam, Medhipalayam Panchayat, Elavoor Post, Kumidipoondi Taluk, Tiruvallur District -601 201. ... Petitioner

¶8

/versus/

¶9

The District Collector Tiruvallur District.

¶10

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ponneri, Tiruvallur District -601 204.

¶11

The Superintendent of Police, Tiruvallur District -602001.

¶12

The Tahsildar, Kumidipoondi Taluk, Tiruvallur District -602001.

¶13

The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Kumidipoondi Taluk, Tiruvallur District -602001.

¶14

1/6

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.No.15964 of 2025

¶17

6. The Inspector Of Police, F-3, Arappakkam Police Station, Kumidipoondi -601 201.

¶18

The Village Administrative Officer, Medhipalayam Panchayat, Elavoor Mathura, Kumidipoondi Taluk, Tiruvallur District -601 201. ... Respondents

¶19

Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 17.04.2025 and dispose the same within the stipulated time period.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.A.S.Balaji, Assisted by Ms.R.Naveen. For Respondents : Dr.S.Suriya, Additional Government Pleader, for R1, R2, R4 & R7. : Dr.C.E.Pratap, Government Advocate (Crl.Side), for R5 & R6

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The writ petition is filed for a mandamus directing the respondents

¶23

to consider the representation dated 17.04 2025 and dispose of the same within

¶24

the stipulated time fixed by this court.

¶25

2/6

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.No.15964 of 2025

¶28

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that a Kangaroo Court is being conducted in the Village by one Mr.Ellappan and others and the villagers have been excommunicated. Originally they were forced to reside in the Community Hall, Nochikuppam and now the situation has improved, they have returned back to their home. Further grievance with reference to the visiting and taking part in the festival of the Temples remain.

¶29

3. When the matter came up for admission, the learned Additional

¶30

Government Pleader representing the respondents would submit that in view of the complaint being received, the same was enquired into a peace committee was also conducted, the petitioner group being the 'A' party and one Mr.Ellappan group being the 'B' party were called for a peace committee and both of them amicably agreed on certain terms and the same was recorded, as per which this year the Mr.Ellappan group will only conduct the festival and the petitioner's group will only collect the contribution in respect of the Temple. In respect of other temples, the parties have agreed that they will jointly conduct the festivals. Therefore, with reference to the current festival, if this Court has to decide on merits, then the other group namely, Mr.Ellappan group has to be heard and only thereafter, the truth or otherwise of the 3/6

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.No.15964 of 2025

¶33

allegations can be decided and since the festival is said to be conducted on 30.04.2025, 01.05.2025 and 02.05.2025 etc., at the last minute, the Court cannot intervene in the same. However, it can be seen that the respondents 1 and 2 shall consider the issue thereafter. If it relates to the entry and worship of the temple, no person can be prevented by any group belonging to the Village and therefore, ensuring the visiting of all Temples by all persons shall be ensured. In future, if any complaint regarding this kind of Kangaroo Court comes to the notice of the respondents, the respondents only have to give police protection to the persons who are excommunicated and all the time, peace committee need not be resorted to and this is happening repeatedly.

¶34

4. This Court already held that in K.Gopal Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu and Others reported in MANU/TN/0672/2005, wherein the Kangaroo Courts are unconstitutional and nobody can be excommunicated or these kind of activities cannot be made by extra constitutional Authorities in villages. Therefore, the authority shall act bearing the same in mind with the firm action against illegality.

¶35

4/6

¶36

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

¶37

W.P.No.15964 of 2025

¶38

5. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no

¶39

order as to costs.

¶40

29.04.2025