The fundamental rights to practice religion, the exemption granted to religious assemblies, and the need for regulatory measures to ensure public safety during religious festivals were central to the judgment.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order, dated 27.04.2023, passed in W.P.(MD) No.8805 of 2023, on the file of this Court.)

1. This intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 27.04.2023 made in W.P.(MD) No.8805 of 2023 filed by the appellant herein. The appellant is an ancient temple. There is a tradition of conducting display of fire works in the concluding session of “Chithirai Festival” after the temple flag is lowered. When the appellant filed the writ petition for directing the second respondent to grant such permission, the learned Judge by the impugned order stipulated a condition that permission may be granted for bursting of fire crackers between 09:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. on 09.05.2023. Aggrieved by the imposition of such condition, this writ appeal has been filed.

2. The learned Judge took note of the fact that during such display of fire works in the year 2015, one J.Jeban Sekar had died. The temple administration was directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) as a matter of humanitarian gesture and without prejudice to the defence of the accused in the pending criminal case. Even though the writ appeal is directed against the entire order, the learned counsel appearing for the temple/appellant informed the Court that this direction to pay compensation has been complied with. Receipt given by the victim''s family was produced before us.

3. The only question that calls for consideration is whether that learned Single Judge was justified in stipulating condition regarding timings. We take note of the fact that this is not the first time the issue has cropped up before this Court. The appellant herein had earlier filed W.P.(MD) No.9701 of 2019 and the said writ petition was allowed on 23.04.2019 in the following terms:-

“2. The writ petitioner is an ancient temple. There is a tradition of conducting display of fireworks in the concluding session of Chithirai festival. The fireworks commence after the flag is brought down at around 12.30 past midnight. The petitioner wants this Court to direct the respondents to grant permission for conducting the public display of fireworks in the traditional manner. In this regard, application dated 20.04.2019 has already been given.

3. The second respondent is the competent authority to grant permission. Since the subject matter pertains to temple festivities, I am of the view that the second respondent ought to grant permission. This is all the more so, because there is nothing novel or new about it. It is a traditional feature. Therefore, the petitioner sought to be permitted to conduct the event in the usual traditional and customary manner.

4. However, it is seen that an accident had taken place a few years back. This Court therefore called upon the petitioner''s counsel that he should name somebody who will assume responsibility to ensure the smooth and accident free conduct of the event. The petitioner''s counsel submitted that the Secretary of the petitioner / Devasthanam namely Thiru.Chandrakumar would be the nodal person to ensure the smooth conduct of the event. He also gave a further undertaking that the second respondent can impose conditions while granting the permission sought for. The second respondent can impose condition as regards the safety issues. It is made clear that there will be no restriction regarding timings.

5. With the above directions, the Writ petition stands allowed. No costs.”

4. Pursuant to the said direction, appropriate proceeding permitting the conduct of the event in the traditional manner was issued. When for the year 2022, the authority declined permission, the appellant herein had filed W.P.(MD) No.8477 of 2022 vide order dated 28.04.2022, the writ petition was disposed of in the following manner:-

“The prayer in this writ petition is to call for the records of the fourth responden