SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 62020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SUNDER MOHAN, J
Rajendran – Appellant
Versus
The Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi District, Tenkasi – Respondent
W.P.Crl(MD)No.1358 of 2025 | W.M.P.Crl.(MD)No.352 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.M.Sankar
For the Respondents: Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, Additional Public Prosecutor

Court denied permission for temple event due to ongoing civil dispute regarding temple management.

Headnote:The Court analyzed the need for permission to conduct cultural events under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, referencing the petitioner’s claim to annual rights and existing disputes regarding temple management. The court held that existing civil proceedings hindered granting exclusive permission. The key issue was whether permission was warranted amidst rival claims. The Court ruled that due to these disputes, permission should not be granted and dismissed the petition, allowing the petitioner merely to partake in worship without conducting the event.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's right to conduct annual event challenged. (Para 1 , 2)
2. dispute over temple management affecting permissions. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court ruling on blocking event permission. (Para 5)
4. final dismissal of the petition. (Para 6)

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN W.P.Crl(MD)No.1358 of 2025 and W.M.P.Crl.(MD)No.352 of 2025 Rajendran ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi District, Tenkasi.

2 The Inspector Of Police, Pavoorchatram Police Station, Tenkasi District. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of impugned proceedings passed by the second respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the second respondent to provide permission and adequate protection for conducting “Kodai Vizha” from 13.09.2025 to 15.09.2025 in Arulmigu Ramasamy Temple situated in Veeraputhiranadanoor, Thippanampatti village, Tenkasi Taluk, Tenkasi District, on basis of the petitioner's representation dated 06.08.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sankar For Respondents : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

The petitioner has sought for a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records of impugned proceedings passed by the second respondent and quash the same and consequently to direct the second respondent to provide permission and adequate protection for conducting “Kodai Vizha” from 13.09.2025 to 15.09.2025 in Arulmigu Ramasamy Temple situated in Veeraputhiranadanoor, Thippanampatti village, Tenkasi Taluk, Tenkasi District, on basis of the petitioner's representation dated

06.08.2025.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had been conducting Kodai Vizha during this time every year and therefore, the respondents ought to have granted permission and the right to worship cannot be denied.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that there is a dispute as regards the Management of the Temple; that a civil suit in O.S.No.730 of 2023 on the file of the Sub Court, Tenkasi, is pending; that since there is an opposition by the rival claimants, such permission cannot be granted to the petitioner alone. He would further submit that there is no bar for either the petitioner or any other parties from worshiping, without conducting any function.

4. He would submit that earlier, when the rival claimant had approached this Court in W.P(MD)No.28216 of 2024, dated 28.11.2024, this Court only permitted the villagers to worship the deity and not conduct any pooja, in view of the pendency of the civil suit.

5. In view of the above order passed by this Court and the reasons cited by the respondents while rejecting the petitioner's representation, this Court is not inclined to grant any protection as prayed for.

6. Hence, this Writ Petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to worship the deity as observed by this Court in W.P(MD)No.28216 of 2024, dated 28.11.2024. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top