JUDGMENT :

SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the third Respondent in his proceedings in C. No. 20/H1PS/2024 dated 22.03.2024 and quash the same as illegal, consequently direct the Respondents to grant permission and adequate police protection for conducting the annual village temple festival of Arulmighu Sri Vinayagar Sri Kaliyamman Sri Mariyamman Sri Muniyandi and Sri Karuppanasamy situated at S.Paraipatty Singarakottai village Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District, scheduled to be held from 31.03.2024 to 02.04.2024.

1. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner had filed this petition seeking to quash the proceedings in C. No. 20/H1PS/2024 dated 22.03.2024 and with a consequential direction to the respondents for granting permission and providing police protection to conduct the annual village temple festival of Arulmighu Sri Vinayagar, Sri Kaliyamman, Sri Mariyamman, Sri Muniyandi and Sri Karuppanasamy situated at S. Paraipatty, Singarakottai Village, Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District, scheduled to be held from 31.03.2024 to 02.04.2024.

2. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) on instructions of the Respondents 1 to 3 would submit that there are rival groups in the village and therefore, peace committee meeting was convened. In the peace committee meeting, the Petitioner did not accept the proposal of the Tahsildar and filed this Writ Petition.

3. The learned Counsel for the fourth Respondent would submit that previous year, there had been clashes in the village and therefore, F.I.R. has been registered against the Petitioner as well as the fourth Respondent. This year, the Tahsildar had conducted peace committee meeting, in which, the fourth Respondent conceded to allow the Petitioner to conduct the temple festival, but not allowed him to act as Mariamman Kovil Poosari. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Poosari had been appointed by the H.R. & C.E Department. The Petitioner has only approached this Court, seeking permission to conduct the festival. The learned Counsel for the fourth Respondent also filed a similar Writ Petition, seeking directions from this Court to the Respondents herein, to consider the representation of the fourth Respondent as writ petitioner, to conduct the emple festival.

4. The submission of the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) is that the Tahsildar may be directed to hold peace committee meeting soon, if the parties agreed for the compromise and the Tahsildar may be directed to issue appropriate direction. The submission of the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) is found justified.

5. Considering the fact that in the previous year, there had been clashes between the Petitioner's group and the fourth Respondent's group, in the light of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side), both the parties are directed to appear before the Thasildar, Vedasandur Taluk. The Inspector of Police, Vadamadurai Police Station, Dindigul District, shall issue summons to the rival parties for their appearance.

6. The Tahsildar/Executive Magistrate shall convene the peace committee meeting, only if both the parties agree for holding temple festival. The Tahsildar, Vedasandur, shall pass appropriate orders, he/she can refuse the permission to conduct the festival, if both sides does not arrive at a compromise.

7. If the Petitioner and the fourth Respondent arrive at a compromise, the Tahsildar/ Executive Magistrate shall grant permission considering the present model code of conduct for the Lok Sabha election which came into force, shall insist such condition. In the light of model code of conduct, the third Respondent shall insist for the conditions imposed by the Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu/Head of State Police Force, Tamil Nadu