Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

S.Murugesan Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

Home
Madras HC
2026
S.Murugesan Vs the District CollectorS.Murugesan v. the District Collector

Dismissed¶34

S.Murugesan v. the District Collector

Madras HC16 Jun 2026WMP/19306/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; WMP No.19306 of 2023; WP No.33433 of 2022; clarification of order dated 13/12/2022; dismissed as infructuous; Article 226 writ petition; Sree Maha Mariyamman Temple Pottakkollai; 10th day festival worship with pooja materials; 50 families; petitioners S. Murugesan, Natrajan, V. Siddharthan; respondents District Collector Ariyalur, Superintendent of Police, District Revenue Officer, Revenue Divisional Officer Udayar Palayam, Tahsildar Jayankondam, Inspector of Police Udayar Palayam Police Station, Revenue Inspector, VAO Thathanur (West); private respondents Chinnadurai, Devendran, Raja, Settu@Chinnadurai, Appadurai, Nagarathinam, Rajasekar, Pandiyan, Rajendran, Kanthasamy; Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan; advocate A.V. Bharathi; Government Advocate (Crl. Side) R. Ganesh Kumar; decision dated 16-06-2026.

What did the court decide?

None - the Writ Miscellaneous Petition was dismissed as infructuous and no clarification of the order in WP No.33433 of 2022 was granted.

Why is it important?

Upon counsel for the petitioner submitting that the clarification relief sought in the Writ Miscellaneous Petition had become infructuous, the Court held that, in view of the above, the Writ Miscellaneous Petition stood dismissed as infructuous. ¶34

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None - the Writ Miscellaneous Petition was dismissed as infructuous and no clarification of the order in WP No.33433 of 2022 was granted.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 13/12/2022 in W.P.No.33433 of 2022 required clarification so as to allow the petitioners and 50 families to worship their deity on the 10th day of the festival with all the pooja materials, as and when scheduled, at Sree Maha Mariyamman Temple, Pottakkollai.

Court's answer

Upon counsel for the petitioner submitting that the clarification relief sought in the Writ Miscellaneous Petition had become infructuous, the Court held that, in view of the above, the Writ Miscellaneous Petition stood dismissed as infructuous.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Madras, G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, J., order dated 16-06-2026: WMP No.19306 of 2023 in WP No.33433 of 2022 - S. Murugesan, Natrajan and V. Siddharthan v. The District Collector, Ariyalur and others (including the Superintendent of Police, District Revenue Officer, Revenue Divisional Officer, Tahsildar, Inspector of Police, Revenue Inspector and VAO of Ariyalur District, and ten private respondents). A Writ Miscellaneous Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for clarification of the order passed in W.P.No.33433 of 2022 dated 13/12/2022, to allow the petitioners and 50 families to worship their deity on the 10th day of the festival with all the pooja materials, as and when the festival is scheduled, at Sree Maha Mariyamman Temple, Pottakkollai. When the matter was taken up, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the clarification relief had become infructuous; accordingly, the Court dismissed the Writ Miscellaneous Petition as infructuous. No substantive adjudication, treatment of precedent, or monetary quantum arises from this disposal.

A

WMP No. 19306 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN

WMP No.19306 of 2023 in WP No. 33433 of 2022

S.Murugesan

Natrajan

3. V.Siddharthan

..Petitioner(s)

Vs.

The District Collector District Collector Office Ariyalur And District.

The Superintendent of Police District Police Office Ariyalur and District.

The District Revenue Officer District Collector Office Ariyalur and District.

The Revenue Divisional Officer Revenue Divisional Office Udayar Palayam, Ariyalur and District.

The Tahsildar Tahsildar Office Jayankondam Ariyalur District.

The Inspector of Police Udayar Palayam Police Station Ariyalur District.

__________ Page1 of 4

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

WMP No. 19306 of 2023

The Revenue Inspector Revenue Inspector Office Udayar Palayam Ariyalur District.

The Village Administrative Officer Village Administrative Office Thathanur (West) Udayar Palayam Taluk Ariyalur District.

Chinnadurai 10.Devendran 11.Raja 12.Settu@Chinnadurai 13.Appadurai 14.Nagarathinam 15.Rajasekar 16.Pandiyan 17.Rajendran 18.Kanthasamy

..Respondent(s)

PRAYER: Writ Miscellaneous Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to pass clarification of the order passed in W.P.No.33433 of 2022 dated 13/12/2022 to the respondents 1 to 8 and to allow the petitioners and 50 families to worship their deity on the 10^th day of the festival with all the pooja materials as and when the festival is scheduled for Sree Maha Mariyamman Temple, Pottakkollai for the present.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.A.V.Bharathi For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) – R1 to R8

ORDER

When the matter was taken up today for consideration, the learned

Page2 of 4

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

WMP No. 19306 of 2023

counsel for the petitioner submitted that the clarification relief sought for in the above Writ Miscellaneous Petition has become infructuous. Accordingly prays

for appropriate orders.

In view of the above, this Writ Miscellaneous Petition stands dismissed

as infructuous.

16-06-2026

kas

To.

1.The District Collector District Collector Office Ariyalur District.

2.The Superintendent of Police District Police Office Ariyalur District.

3.The District Revenue Officer District Collector Office Ariyalur District.

4.The Revenue Divisional Officer Revenue Divisional Office Udayar Palayam, Ariyalur District.

5.The Tahsildar Tahsildar Office Jayankondam Ariyalur District.

__________ Page3 of 4

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

WMP No. 19306 of 2023

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

kas

6.The Inspector of Police Udayar Palayam Police Station Ariyalur District.

7.The Revenue Inspector Revenue Inspector Office Udayar Palayam Ariyalur District.

8.The Village Administrative Officer Village Administrative Office Thathanur (West) Udayar Palayam Taluk Ariyalur District.

WMP No.19306 of 2023 in WP No. 33433 of 2022

16-06-2026

__________ Page4 of 4

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

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the order dated 13/12/2022 in W.P.No.33433 of 2022 required clarification so as to allow the petitioners and 50 families to worship their deity on the 10th day of the festival with all the pooja materials, as and when scheduled, at Sree Maha Mariyamman Temple, Pottakkollai.¶25
The court held
Upon counsel for the petitioner submitting that the clarification relief sought in the Writ Miscellaneous Petition had become infructuous, the Court held that, in view of the above, the Writ Miscellaneous Petition stood dismissed as infructuous.ratio¶34

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶25

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Order dated 13/12/2022 passed in W.P.No.33433 of 2022, which the petitioners sought to have clarified through the present Writ Miscellaneous Petition addressed to respondents 1 to 8.¶25

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
S.Murugesan¶7
A.V. Bharathi
petitioner
Natrajan¶8
A.V. Bharathi
petitioner
V.Siddharthan¶9
A.V. Bharathi
respondent
The District Collector¶12
R. Ganesh Kumar
respondent
The Superintendent of Police¶13
R. Ganesh Kumar
respondent
The District Revenue Officer¶14
R. Ganesh Kumar
respondent
The Revenue Divisional Officer¶15
R. Ganesh Kumar
respondent
The Tahsildar¶16
R. Ganesh Kumar
respondent
The Inspector of Police¶17
R. Ganesh Kumar
respondent
The Revenue Inspector¶21
R. Ganesh Kumar
respondent
The Village Administrative Officer¶22
R. Ganesh Kumar
respondent
Chinnadurai¶23
respondent
Devendran¶23
respondent
Raja¶23
respondent
Settu@Chinnadurai¶23
respondent
Appadurai¶23
respondent
Nagarathinam¶23
respondent
Rajasekar¶23
respondent
Pandiyan¶23
respondent
Rajendran¶23
respondent
Kanthasamy¶23

Coram

AI extract

G.K. Ilanthiraiyanauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 16 Jun 2026 · June
Registered: 4 Jul 2023
Case no.: WMP/19306/2023
CNR: HCMA011170762023
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: G.k. Ilanthiraiyan
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: WMP

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from G.k. Ilanthiraiyan

C.Gunasekaran Vs District Collector
15 Jun 2026
Omr Priya Diagnostic Centre Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Director of Medical and Rural Health Services
15 Jun 2026
Zeba Amreen Z. Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police
15 Jun 2026
Kuppusamy Vs The Superintendent of Police
16 Jun 2026
Kumar Vs The Superintendent of Police
16 Jun 2026
Swamy Chandar @ S.Chandar Vs The Commissioner of Police
16 Jun 2026

Cite this judgement

S.Murugesan v. the District Collector, WMP/19306/2023 (MAD), decided on 16 June 2026.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226

View all statutes

Procedural history1

Order dated 13/12/2022 passed in W.P.No.33433 of 2022, which the petitioners sought to have clarified through the present Writ Miscellaneous Petition addressed to respondents 1 to 8.

View full history

Bench / Coram

G.K. Ilanthiraiyan

Parties & counsel