SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 25426

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
L. VICTORIA GOWRI, J
Chinnathambi – Appellant
Versus
The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District – Respondent
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1337 of 2026



Important Points

The court emphasized the need for procedural fairness in addressing competing claims for the participation in conducting a religious festival.

Subject

Writ Jurisdiction - Religious Freedoms and Rights

Headnote

Statute Analysis: The petition seeks a Writ of Mandamus as per the provisions applicable to religious rights and freedoms. Facts of the Case: The petitioner requests permission to conduct the Panguni Uthiram Festival as per the representation dated 23.02.2026.

Findings of Court:
The Court observed rival claims over participation rights in the festival leading to the directive for notice and appropriate orders.|

Issues: The court framed questions regarding the rights of both parties to conduct the festival.

Ratio Decidendi: The reasoning was based on evaluating the competing claims of parties involved, emphasizing the need for notice to all interested parties.

Result: With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

Advocates:
For the Appellant: Mr. M..Prabu
For the Respondents: Mr.S.Ravi, Mr.Muthumalairaja

Table of Content
1. petition for writ of mandamus (Para 1 , 2)
2. rival claims for conducting the festival (Para 3)
3. court directive for notice and orders (Para 4)

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to grant permission and protection to conduct the Panguni Uthiram Festival on 01.04.2026 in Arasankulam Sri Santhanamariamman Sri Sudalaimadan Sri Kombamadan Thirukovil situated at Cheranmahadevi Taluk, Tirunelveli District, based on the petitioner's representation dated 23.02.2026.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner's representation should be considered and he has to be permitted to conduct temple festival.

3. However, the learned counsel for the 4th respondent categorically contended that already, peace committee has been convened with the petitioner's group which is B Party and the 4th respondent group which is A party and it is only the A party who are entitled to conduct temple festival and the petitioner has in no manner any right to conduct festival, however he can participate in the festival.

4. Since rival claims have arisen with respect to the right to conduct temple festival, the second respondent is directed to put the petitioner's party and 4th respondent's party on notice and pass appropriate orders considering the petitioners representation and pass appropriate orders on or before

01.04.2026.

5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top