Peace committee resolutions lack statutory force; separate festival celebrations may be allowed if law and order is maintained.

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY and W.M.P.Crl.(MD)No.661 of 2026 S.Sukumar ...Petitioner Vs

1.The District Collector, District Collector Office, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

3.The Superintedent of Police, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

4.The Tahsildar, Thiruppuvanam Taluk, Sivagangai District.

5.The Inspector of Police, Thiruppuvanam Police Station, Sivagangai District. ...Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 3 and 5 to grant permission and adequate police protection to the petitioner and his community members for conducting the Arulmigu Sri Pon Muniyandi Temple Festival at T.Parankulam Village, Sivagangai District including the “Valli Thirumana Drama” at 10.00 p.m. on 22.05.2026.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Ragatheesh Kumar For M/s.Issac Chambers For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.B.Ramanathan Additional Government Pleader For R-3 to R-5 : Mr.A.S.Abul Kalam Azad Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 3 and 5 to grant permission and adequate police protection to the petitioner and his community members for conducting the Arulmigu Sri Pon Muniyandi Temple Festival at T.Parankulam Village, Sivagangai District including the “Valli Thirumana Drama” at 10.00 p.m. on 22.05.2026.

2. The learned Government Advocate submitted that there are already rival groups claiming the right to conduct the Valli Thirumana Drama as well as the temple festival. The police are still maintaining a picketing point in the village area. The revenue authorities attempted to convene a peace committee meeting, wherein it was resolved not to conduct the Valli Thirumana Drama.

3. However, the contention of the petitioner is that he is not inclined to conduct the Valli Thirumana Drama in the temple land, but is inclined to conduct the same in Survey No.176/5, which is a private property belonging to one Balasundaram. The said Balasundaram has no objection to conducting the same on his property. The peace committee meeting had resolved not to conduct the Valli Thirumana Drama at temple land. However, the petitioner is inclined to conduct it separately and not in the temple land, which cannot be prevented.

4. All persons have a right to conduct dramas, provided the same does not affect law and order. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be restrained. The petitioner is relying on the judgment rendered in W.P.(MD)Nos.25631 and

26234 of 2023, dated 01.11.2023, wherein this Court has held as under:

“3. After hearing the learned counsel on either side, I am of the view that unity cannot be forced. If the Nayakkar community wants to celebrate the Temple festival separately, they cannot be prevented from doing so. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P(MD)No.26234 of 2023 makes it clear that they have no objection for Yadhava Community to celebrate the Temple festival first. This concession given by the learned counsel appearing for the Nayakkar community is placed on record.

4. I have been consistently holding that decision taken in a peace committee meeting does not have any statutory backing. Breach of decision taken in the peace committee meeting cannot lead to any legal consequence. I have also held that for celebrating a village Temple festival in a peaceful manner, permission from the authorities also not required.”

5. As rightly pointed out, unity cannot be forced. Even human beings belong to the animal kingdom. As per the behavioural pattern in the animal kingdom, there can be unity only up to a certain extent. Beyond that, there will be divisions