M/s.Madurai Mutharaiyar Welfare Association Vs The Joint Commissioner

Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent to accept the payment for Mandagapadi and include the Madurai Mutharaiyar Welfare Association Mandapadi (1435 pasali mandagapadi) at 1-B, Perumal Kovil Street, Thallakulam Post, Madurai District, in the

¶15

1/6

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.13017 of 2026

¶18

procession path for the visit of Lord Kallazhagar during the Chithirai Festival 2026 from 30.04.2026 to 04.05.2026.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Vishnu, Advocate

¶20

For R1 : Mr.J.K.Jayaselan, Government Advocate For R2 : Mr.V.Chandrasekar, Advocate For R3 : Mr.K.Gnanasekaran, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The present Writ Petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to accept the payment for Mandagapadi and to include the Madurai Mutharaiyar Welfare Association Mandapadi at No.1-B, Perumal Kovil Street, Thallakulam Post, Madurai District.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the concerned association which has been conducting the Mandagapadi. Except for the 4^th respondent, who is unnecessarily attempting to interfere with the activity without any right, the petitioner is otherwise entitled to conduct the Mandagapadi and it can even be directed only for three to five minutes. Today is the last date for accepting payment

¶24

2/6

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.(MD)No.13017 of 2026

¶27

for Mandagapadi. Therefore, the learned counsel would submit that this Court may direct the respondents to accept the payment and issue a receipt, and also direct the police to provide protection against the 4^th respondent. It is stated that the festival is scheduled to commence on 30.04.2026.

¶28

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Temple submitted that, although this Court granted permission last year, when the Deity was taken in procession, both sides engaged in a conflict in the presence of the Deity, resulting in a law and order situation. This year, when a report was sought from the Inspector of Police, an adverse report was submitted indicating a likelihood of serious law and order problems. Therefore, the Temple is not accepting the payment for Mandagapadi.

¶29

When two rival groups are in conflict with respect to a particular Mandagapadi, passing an order at the last minute without hearing the other side would not be appropriate in law. It is evident that every year parties approach this Court at the last moment, and orders are passed, which only result in law and order issues on the ground. Even if it is true that only on account of the lone voice of the 4th respondent, the petitioner is scuttled,

¶30

3/6

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.(MD)No.13017 of 2026

¶33

the petitioner can file an appropriate application before the Joint Commissioner under Section 63 of HR & CE Act, 1959. Upon conducting an enquiry after hearing both sides, the Joint Commissioner can pass appropriate orders which will thereafter govern the rights of the parties permanently. This alone is the solution to the case, rather than passing ad hoc orders at the last moment.

¶34

When it is mentioned that there is a law and order problem, at the

¶35

last moment, this Court is not inclined to interfere into the same. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file an application under Section 63 regarding their customary right to conduct the Mandagapadi. The Joint Commissioner is directed to decide the issue after issuing notice to all contesting parties and pass final orders, which shall be binding as to the rights of the parties from the next year onwards.

¶36