A writ of mandamus cannot be issued to bypass regulatory procedures for the establishment of a religious institution where the premises were constructed under a different designation through misrepresentation.

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.04.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Miller Mancing .. Petitioner – Vs. -

The District Collector, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District. .. Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to grant permission/NOC to the petitioner to run a prayer hall and conduct prayers at Indian Evangelical Lutheran Church (community welfare hall), Survey No.393/5, Kumarapuram, Putheri Village, Agastheeswaram Taluk, Kanyakumari District, within the time stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Micheal Sebastin For Respondent : Mr.M.Lingadurai Special Government Pleader

ORDER

The Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus, directing the respondent to grant permission/NOC to the petitioner to run a prayer hall and conduct prayers at Indian Evangelical Lutheran Church (community welfare hall), Survey No.393/5, Kumarapuram, Putheri Village, Agastheeswaram Taluk, Kanyakumari District.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the prayer meetings have been going on in the above building for the past 15 years. Suddenly, some third-party miscreants have submitted a petition on account of which now the prayers have been stopped. The petitioner constructed the same as a community hall and they are using the hall for community service purposes also. Additionally, when prayer meetings are being conducted and when fifty families are attending the prayers, the same should not be stopped. Therefore, the petitioner has sought for permission.

3. I have also heard the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent.

4. Even a perusal of the representation shows that the petitioner has constructed the aforesaid premises by representing it as a “r%f eyf; $lk”; (community hall). If the petitioner wants to put up a church, there is a specific procedure for getting the planning approval, thereafter getting the approval of the District Collector, they should have put it up. In order to overcome, they cannot lie before the authorities and thereafter, this Court cannot give direction, laying a premium on the false representation that was made. Even religiously, Psalm 101/7 says as follows:

"No one who practices deceit will dwell in my house; no one who speaks falsely will stand in my presence"

5. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioner as such cannot be granted.

But, however, it will be open for the petitioner to apply for regularisation of the said place as a place of worship and obtain due permission from the District Collector and if such permission is granted, thereafter, the place can be used as a church.

6. With the aforesaid liberty to make appropriate application first to make a regularisation with the change of user and the permission for establishment of a religious institution before the District Collector, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. As and when the same is made, the same will be considered on its own merits. No costs.