2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 72509
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
R.GAJAPATHY – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector – Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 26.11.2025 CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA and W.P.M.P. (Crl.) No.710 of 2025 R.Gajapathy, S/o Ramasamy ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector, Chengalpet, Chengalpet District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengalpet, Chengalpet District.
3.The Tahsildar, Chengalpet Taluk, Chengalpet District.
4.The Superintendent of Police, Chengalpet, Chengalpet District.
5.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mamallapuram Division, Chengalpet District.
6.The Inspector of Police, Mamallapuram Police Station, Chengalpet District.
7.Chokkalingam, S/o Govinthasamy
8.Neelakandan, S/o Duraisamy
9.Durai, S/o Balaraman
10.Karthick, S/o Balakrishnan
11.M.Mohan, S/o Muthu
12.Durai, S/o Thambiran
13.L.Ananthakumar, S/o Loganathan
14.Suresh, S/o Saminathan
15.Rathinam, S.o Aathikesavan (Respondents 7 to 15 are residing at Vadanemili Village, Perur Post, Chengalpet District.) ..Respondent(s)
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 4 to 6 to take action against the respondents 7 to 13 for preventing the petitioner and his family members along with 7 families from worshiping Sri Gangaiamman Temple and consequently, directing the respondents 1 to 6 to forbear the respondents 7 to 13 from conducting/preparation for the consecration function scheduled to be held on 27.11.2025 for Sri Gangaiamman Temple in S.No.320/3 situated at Vadanemili Village, Perur Post, Chengalpet District till there is quietus in this issue.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Balu For Respondents: Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 to R6 Mr.A.Murugavel for R7 to R15
O R D E R
This writ petition (criminal) has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents 4 to 6 to take action against the respondents 7 to 15 (wrongly stated as respondents 7 to 13 in the prayer) for preventing the petitioner and his family members along with 7 families from worshiping Sri Gangaiamman Temple and a consequential direction to the official respondents to forbear the private respondents from conducting/preparing for the temple consecration function scheduled to be held tomorrow (Thursday) for Sri Gangaiamman Temple in S.No.320/3 situated at Vadanemili Village, Perur Post, Chengalpet District, till a quietus is reached in this issue.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he is a resident of Vadanemili Village, Chengalpet District and there is a temple in the village named Sri Gangaiamman temple in S.No.320/3 which was constructed before 100 years and the residents of the said village and nearby villages used to visit the temple and worship the deity. It is the further case of the petitioner that the private respondents, who claim to be the Panchayatdars of the village, are regularly conducting 'kangaroo courts' and they have decided to conduct the temple consecration festival by excommunicating 8 families, including the petitioner's family and they have prevented them from participating in the temple consecration festival.
3. It is the further case of the petitioner that the petitioner and 7 others had lodged a complaint before the official respondents on 07.11.2025 seeking action against the private respondents, for not permitting them to participate in the temple consecration festival. Thereafter, a detailed representation dated 08.11.2025 was also made to the official respondents by one Divya (D/o Dhandapani) who belonged to one of the excommunicated families which is still pending and the official respondents, without taking action against the private respondents, had closed the complaint in C.S.R. No.1286 of 2025 which emanated from the aforesaid complaint dated 07.11.2025, on 21.11.2025 directing the petitioner to seek judicial remedy before the appropriate forum, resulting in the filing of the present writ petition.
4. Mr.K.Balu, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the petitioners and 7 other excommunicated