2023:MHC:3446 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 04.07.2023 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P. No. 19867 of 2017 and W.M.P. No. 21446 of 2017 Anbarasan … Petitioner -vs-

1. The District Revenue Officer Salem District O/o the District Collector Salem – 636 401.

2. The Sub-Collector Mettur, Salem District-636 401.

3. S.Manickam

4. Venkatachalam

5. Govindan

6. Kandasamy 7. Ramasamy

8. The Inspector of Police Mecheri, Mettur Taluk Salem District – 636 453. ... Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the official respondents to take appropriate action on petitioner representation dated 28.06.2017 to the first respondent and 30.06.2017 to second respondent and dispose the same in accordance with the order passed in O.S. No. 38 of 2010 filed by the third respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr. B.Manoharan For Respondents : Mr. D.Ravichander (RR1, 2 and 8)

Special Government Pleader RR3, 5 and 7 – No appearance R4 – deceased steps due R6 – Not ready in notice

O R D E R

The writ petition has been instituted to direct the official respondents to take appropriate action on the petitioner's representation dated 28.06.2017 to the first respondent and the representation dated 30.06.2017 to the second respondent and dispose the same in accordance with the order passed in O.S.No. 38 of 2010 filed by the third respondent.

2. The petitioner states that he is the owner of the subject property, in which, a temple is situated behind the back of the petitioner. The official respondents are granting permission to conduct festivals by utilizing the land belonging to the writ petitioner. In this regard, the petitioner submitted a representation to the 1^st respondent/District Revenue Officer on 30.06.2017, which was not considered and therefore, the present writ petition is filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the Civil Suit instituted ended in his favour and the Appeal Suit filed in A.S.No.23 of 2008 filed by the other parties were allowed. There is a specific finding that the appellants are not entitled for the relief as such sought for. Therefore, the permission granted without reference to the decree passed by the Civil Courts are untenable.

4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 1, 2 and 8 brought to the notice of this Court that the Festivals were conducted during the relevant point of time and on account of efflux of time, the cause did not exists and the writ petition became infructuous.

5. May that as it be. The official respondents 1 and 2 hereinafter shall refer the decree passed by the Civil Courts before granting any permission to conduct festivals in the subject property. In the event of any application from any person to conduct festival, all relevant records including the objections and the decree passed by the Civil Courts are to be considered before taking any decision.

6. With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

04.07.2023 kak Index : Yes Speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes To

1. The District Revenue Officer Salem District O/o the District Collector Salem – 636 401.

2. The Sub-Collector Mettur, Salem District-636 401.

3.The Inspector of Police Mecheri, Mettur Taluk Salem District – 636 453.

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

kak

04.07.2023