##PAGE1##

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.08.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.DILIP KUMAR W.P(MD)No.14181 of 2021 and W.M.P.(MD).No.11128 of 2021 G.Marimuthu ... Petitioner Vs

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

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

3.The Tahsildar, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District.

4.The Block Development Officer, Manamadurai, Sivagangai District.

##PAGE2##

5.The President, Kalkurichi Village Panchayat, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District.

6.Alen Isaac Devadoss ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in pursuant to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.R2/10400/2021 dated 13.05.2021 and quash the same and remove the new construction of Church building made by the sixth respondent in Survey No.218/7B1B in M.G.R. Nagar, Dhayapuram Village, K.K.Pallam Revenue Village, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District.

For Petitioner : Mr.Karthikeya Venkitachalapathy For R-1 to R-4 : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff, Special Government Pleader For R-6 : Mr.R.Karunanidhi

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.DHANDAPANI.J.)

This writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned order passed by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.R2/10400/2021, dated 13.05.2021, and consequently, to direct the respondents to remove the newly constructed Church building put up by the sixth respondent in Survey No.218/7B1B, M.G.R.

##PAGE3##

Nagar, Dhayapuram Village, K.K.Pallam Revenue Village, Manamadurai Taluk, Sivagangai District.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a District Executive Committee Member of Hindu Munnani, which is a Hindu social organisation. It is submitted that Muthumariamman Temple is situated at Dhayapuram Village and, in close proximity to the said temple, the sixth respondent has constructed/undertaken reconstruction of a Church building without obtaining prior permission from the District Collector, as required under Rule 4(3) of the Tamil Nadu Building Rules, 1997.

4. It is further submitted that, aggrieved by the said construction, the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.(MD).No.5450 of 2021. This Court, by order dated 28.04.2021, after taking note of the fact that the construction had been undertaken without obtaining prior permission from the District Administration, directed the District Administration to lock and seal the premises. At the same time, liberty was granted to the seventh respondent therein to submit an application to the District Collector within one week from 28.04.2021 seeking permission for putting up a prayer hall. It was further directed that, on receipt of such application, the District Collector shall consider the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of ten days thereafter.

##PAGE4##

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that, though this Court had directed the District Collector to consider the application in accordance with law, the District Collector ought to have afforded an opportunity to the local residents and other persons who may be affected by the proposed construction. It is submitted that the Muthumariamman Temple is situated within a distance of about 45 metres from the Church building and that permitting a Christian prayer hall in such close proximity would result in law and order issues in the locality. It is therefore contended that the impugned order granting permission to the sixth respondent has been passed without properly considering the objections raised by the petitioner and the surrounding circumstances. Hence, the petitioner seeks interference with the impugned order.

##PAGE5##

6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing