Court directs permission for traditional fireworks display enforcing prior Division Bench safety protocols and time limits.

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 06.04.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Koottalamoodu Arulmighu Bathreshwari Devasthanam Represented by its Secretary C.Rajkumar S/o.Chinna Nadar Painkulam Kanyakumari District - 629 173. ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, Kanyakumari.

2. The District Revenue Officer, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District - 629 001.

3. The Inspector of police, Pudhukadai Police Station, Kanyakumari District. ...Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd Respondent to grant permission for traditional public display of fireworks in the 10th day of Chithirai Festival at Koottalamoodu Arulmigu Bathreshwari Amman Temple situated at Painkulam, Kanyakumari District on 13.05.2026 after Thirukodi Irakkam from 12.00am to 6.00am by considering the representation of the Petitioner dated 06.03.2026 and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

For Petitioner :Mr.K.Jeyamohan For R1 and R2 :Mr.M.Lingadurai Special Government Pleader For R3 :Mr.Gnanasekaran Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed for a mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent to grant permission for traditional public display of fireworks in the 10^th day of Chithirai Festival at Koottalamoodu Arulmigu Bathreshwari Amman Temple situated at Painkulam, Kanyakumari District on 13.05.2026 after Thirukodi Irakkam from 12.00 a.m. to 06.00.am by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 06.03.2026.

2. Heard Mr.K.Jeya Mohan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.M.Lingadurai, learned Special Government Pleader, who takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.K.Gnanasekaran, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), who takes notice on behalf of the 3^rd respondent.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is a tradition to display fireworks upon the “Thirukkodi Irakkam” at Koottalamoodu Arulmigu Bathreshwari Amman Temple. In previous years, when permission was denied, this Court directed the respondents to grant permission for the event in the following year as well. Even though an application has been made for this year, no orders have been passed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. The petitioner has engaged Sony Fireworks Limited and Supreme Fireworks Limited, who will conduct the fireworks display in a precautionary manner. All other safety instructions including a restriction on allowing the general public within 150 meters of the site, will also be strictly enforced. The temple plans to spend approximately Rs.8,00,000/- for this purpose.

5. When the matter came up for hearing today, learned Special Government Pleader and learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondents would submit that in a previous year, one person died and the criminal case in connection with that incident is still pending. In another year, there were law and order problems between two groups. The criminal cases in respect of these incidents are still pending, and for this reason, permission has not been granted.

6. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that considering all the above aspects, the matter was finally considered by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court. After noting that the family of the deceased person had been paid Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation and that additional protections were put in place, the Hon'ble Division Bench considered the issue in W.A.(M