Madras High Court
M.Karthikeyan ` vs K.Pandaram on 6 August, 2024
Author: R.Subramanian
Bench: R.Subramanian
W.A.(MD) No.1311 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 06.08.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
W.A.(MD) No.1311 of 2024
and
C.M.P.(MD) No.10217 of 2024
M.Karthikeyan ` ... Appellant
-vs-
1.K.Pandaram
2.The Tahsildar,
Kayathar Taluk,
Thoothukudi District. ... Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the
order, dated 26.06.2024, passed in W.P.(MD) No.12610 of 2024, on the file of
this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Jerin Mathew
For R1 : Mr.P.Banuprasath
For R2 : Mr.P.T.Thiraviyam
Government Advocate
____________
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.1311 of 2024
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.]
The dispute relates to an attempt to gain control of Shri
Karuppasamy Temple and Shri Kaliamman Temple at Ottudanpatti,
Thoothukudi District. It is very sad that such dispute reached the portals of
this Court.
2. It is the claim of the appellant / petitioner in the Writ Petition
that the second respondent had locked the Temples for nearly four years. The
Writ Court has directed the second respondent to remove the lock. It is now
aggrieved, the appellant has come up with this Writ Appeal.
3. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that
the doors of the Temples have been removed by the appellant / petitioner in
the Writ Petition in collaboration with the Villagers and a criminal case has
also been foisted against him.
4. No doubt, the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India is not intended for resolving such disputes, as there is a separate
mechanism available to determine who should manage the Temple. However,
this Court can consider the potential for a breach of public peace and, in order
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
to maintain tranquility, can step in under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, as has been done by the learned Single Judge.
5. From the rival contentions raised before us, we find that the
dispute has become more intense and both the parties are at loggerheads.
Hence, we direct the Executive Officer of Shenbagavalli Amman Temple,
Kovilpatti, Tuticorin District, to take charge of the Temples and maintain the
same, till such time, the dispute as to who should manage the Temples is
resolved by the competent authority or the competent Court. The Executive
Officer of Shenbagavalli Amman Temple, Kovilpatti, Tuticorin District, will take
charge of the Temples within a period of three weeks from today and file a
report before this Court.
6. This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above
observation. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is
closed.
7. List the case on 27.08.2024, ''for reporting compliance''
NCC : No [R.S.M., J.] [L.V.G., J.]
Index : No 06.08.2024
Internet : Yes
smn2
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Copy to:-
The Executive Officer,
Sri Shenbagavalli Amman Temple,
Kovilpatti,
Tuticorin District.
To:-
The Tahsildar,
Kayathar Taluk,
Thoothukudi District.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
and
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
smn2
and
06.08.2024
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
