Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 32612
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J
M.Pandiyarajan – Appellant
Versus
The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District. – Respondent
Writ Petition|Na.Ka.No.12/Ka.A/Thiruppuvanam/2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.T.Aswin Raja Simman
For the Respondents:Mr.S.Ravi Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.M.Muthumanikkam Government Advocate(Civil Side)
Court directs inquiry and peace committee for permission amid election code and group rivalry.
Headnote:The petitioner challenged an order rejecting permission for a cultural drama performance citing election code and prior law and order issues. The court noted the impugned order referenced the election code of conduct. Directions issued for inquiry by Revenue Divisional Officer. Issues framed around validity of rejection due to election code and rival group concerns. The court reasoned that proper inquiry and peace committee could resolve objections, directing consensus-based permission. Writ petition disposed of with directions for enquiry and facilitation if consensus achieved.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments on rivalry and order grounds. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. review of impugned order materials. (Para 4) |
| 3. directs enquiry and peace committee. (Para 5) |
| 4. petition disposed with directions. (Para 6) |
ORDER
Challenging the impugned order pass by the 2ndrespondent on 12.04.2026, negating the petitioner's application to conduct Valli Thirumanam drama on 18.04.2026 in Sri Ponmuniyandi Swamy Temple and consequently, to grant permission to conduct the same with adequate police protection, this writ petition is filed.
2. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the application seeking permission to conduct Valli Thirumanam drama was rejected only because of the rivalry between two groups, which had resulted in a law and order problem during earlier temple festivals. The petitioner, without impleading the rival parties, had filed this writ petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner responded by submitting that the said submission made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor is not reflected in the impugned order itself. If at all, any group of people belonging to the said village have any objection with respect to conduct of Valli Thirumanam, they can very well appear before the 2nd respondent police and address their grievance.
4. Heard the learned counsel on either side and carefully perused the materials available on record.
5. A careful reading of the impugned order would reveal that, since the code of conduct for election is in force, the petitioner's application was rejected. In this regard, the Special Officer / Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruppuvanam, Sivagangai is suo motu impleaded as 3rd respondent. The 3rd respondent is directed to forthwith conduct an enquiry on 17.04.2026. The petitioner is directed to appear for enquiry before the 3rd respondent at 10.00 a.m. on 17.04.2026 at Thiruppuvanam Revenue Divisional Office. The 2nd respondent police is directed to furnish the details of the rival parties to the 3rd respondent by today (16.04.2026) 5.00 p.m. On the receipt of the same, the 3rd respondent is directed to take necessary steps to summon the rival parties and conduct a peace committee and thereafter, pass necessary orders, facilitating conduct of Valli Thirumanam drama, in accordance with law, if any consensus is arrived.
6. With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
