The court has the authority to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the granting of permission for conducting temple festivals and mythological dramas, while ensuring compliance with conditions to maintain law and order and noise level norms.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to give proper permission for Arulmigu Kattikulam Sootukole Mayandi Swamy's 92nd year of Guru Poojai function and “Valli Thiruman Nadagam” on 30.09.2022 at about 10.00 P.M. to 06.00 A.M and “Sathiyavan Savithri @ Mythological Nadagam” on 01.10.2022 at about 10.00 P.M. to 06.00 A.M., at Arulmigu Kattikulam Sootukole Mayandi Swamy's Temple campus of Drama stage in Survey No.207/7E, on the file Thirupparankundram Village Group, Madurai District.)

R. MAHADEVAN, J.

1. The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to give permission for conducting Arulmigu Kattikulam Sootukole Mayandi Swamy's 92nd year of Guru Poojai function and “Valli Thirumanam Nadagam” on 30.09.2022 at about 10.00 P.M. to 06.00 A.M and “Sathiyavan Savithri a mythological drama” on 01.10.2022 at about 10.00 P.M. to 06.00 A.M., at Arulmigu Kattikulam Sootukole Mayandi Swamy's Temple situated in Survey No.207/7E, Thirupparankundram Village Group, Madurai District.

2. Heard Mr.R.Udhayakumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.T.Senthil Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondents. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a Managing Trustee of Arulmigu Kattikulam Sootukole Mayandi Swamy Temple, Thirupparankundram, Madurai District. In the said temple, every year in the month of September to October, the petitioner / Managing Trustee and the villagers of the aforesaid village used to conduct the Guru Pooja for Arulmigu Kattikulam Sootukole Mayandi Swamy Temple along with mythological drama. For this year, the said festival is scheduled on 30.09.2022 at about 10.00 P.M. to 06.00 A.M. and on 01.10.2022 at about 10.00 P.M. to 06.00 A.M. The petitioner made representations on 01.09.2022 and 21.09.2022 to the respondents, seeking permission to conduct the festival and mythological drama on the abovesaid dates. Despite receipt of the said representations, the respondents have not passed any orders. Hence this writ petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that seeking permission for the very same temple festival in the year 2017, the petitioner had approached this Court vide W.P(MD) No.17334 of 2017 and this Court by order dated 14.09.2017, has passed the following order:-

“The writ petitioner has moved this Court for directing the second respondent to give permission for conducting Arulmigu Kattikulam Sootukole Mayandi Swamy's 87th year of Guru Poojai function and “Sree Valli Thirumanam Nadagam” on 25.09.2017 at about 10.00 P.M to 06.00 A.M and “Paktha Maheswari Nadagam” on 26.09.2017 at about 10.00 P.M to 06.00 A.M at Arulmigu Kattikulam Sootukole Mayandi Swamy's Temple campus of Drama Stage in Survey No.207/7E on the file of Thirupparankundram Village Group, Madurai District. The writ petitioner has earlier submitted an application dated 09.09.2017 in this regard.

2. By consent of both parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the writ petitioner as well as the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.

4. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner placed reliance on the order dated 03.10.2016 made in W.P.(MD)No. 19132 of 2016, filed by the writ petitioner for the year 2016.

5. It is not the case of the respondents that the petitioner herein did not comply with the conditions imposed in the order dated 03.10.2016. Arulmigu Kattikulam Sootukole Mayandi Swamigal was a renowned mystic and therefore the customary celebration of the said mutt deserve to be permitted to be held. It is not the case of the respondents that granting permission as sought fo