The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of maintaining communal harmony and avoiding discrimination in the conduct of temple festivals, as well as considering the law and order situation.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to fourth respondent proceedings made in Na.Ka.No.1/2021, dated 26.02.2021, quash the same and direct the second to fourth respondents herein to conduct the car festival of Arulmighu Achiramavalliamman Temple, Jangamarajapuram, Lalgudi Taluk, Trichy District, in the light of direction issued by the Division Bench of this Court in order made in W.A. (MD) No.381 of 2020, dated 10.03.2020.

Writ Petition filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the order dated 04.02.2022 issued by the first respondent vide proceedings Na.Ka.A1/0173/2021, banning the Maasi Month Temple Car Festival of Arulmigu Aachiramavalli Amman Temple, Jengamarajapuram, Lalgudi Taluk, Trichy and to quash the same and consequently to direct the fourth respondent to conduct the temple car festival without any interruption.)

Common Order

1. By this common order, both Writ Petitions are being disposed

W.P.(MD)No.5036 of 2011

2. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the impugned order / proceedings of the fourth respondent, the Trustee / Thakkar, dated 26.02.2021 bearing reference Na.Ka.No.1/2021.

3. By the impugned order / proceedings dated 26.02.2021, the fourth respondent had decided to conduct the temple festival in Aachiramavalli Amman Temple, Jengamarajapuram, Lalgudi Taluk, Trichy during 2021 by stating that there was no discrimination between the members of different communities when the temple festival was conducted during 2020 as all persons including persons belonging to the Schedule Caste Adi Dravidar Community were allowed to participate in the temple festival without discrimination.

4. The fourth respondent Trustee / Takkar has also stated that the request of the persons belonging to Schedule Caste Adi Dravidar community for bringing the Temple Car through the streets than the regular path, cannot be accepted by the management of the temple.

5. It is submitted that the temple festival in the aforesaid temple had remained suspended from 1994 and Mr.Prabhu Nambiappan, who is the petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.3663 of 2022 had earlier filed W.P. (MD)No.3582 of 2020 for the permission to conduct the temple festival. The temple festival which was in hibernation from 1994 was sought to be revived in terms of the order dated 26.02.2020 of this Court in the said W.P.(MD)No.3582 of 2020. The learned Single Judge of this Court allowed the said W.P.(MD)No.3582 of 2020 with the following observations:-

6. The festival of this nature touches upon the sentiments of the people. Hence, the third respondent is directed to ensure that the festival is conducted periodically without stopping it for unnecessary reasons. As the dates in this regard starts from 10.03.2020 to 13.03.2020, the third respondent is also directed to take immediate action for the conduct of the above said festival. The third respondent is at liberty to avail any police protection if necessary for the conduct of the said festival.

6. The petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.5036 of 2011, as a third party, filed W.A.(MD)No.381 of 2020 before the Division Bench of this Court against the aforesaid order dated 26.02.2020 in W.P.(MD)No.3582 of 2020 of the learned Single Judge. After noting the rival submissions of the respective petitioners herein, the Division Bench disposed W.A. (MD)No.381 of 2020 with the following observations:-

7. To create a conducive atmosphere, which may also pave way for celebrating the festival with the full participation of all communities and to avoid any one to feel that they are discriminated, the learned Counsel for the first respondent also agreed that this year festival can be celebrated by taking the temple car through any one of the streets suggested by the appellant and approved by the Executive Officer of the temple.

8. The learned Single Judge has directed the fourth respondent in this appeal to ensure that the