Madras High Court

K.Sivaraj vs Tahsildar on 1 April, 2025

Author: S.M.Subramaniam

Bench: S. M. Subramaniam

    2025:MHC:988
                                                                                       WA No. 215 of 2025




                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED: 01-04-2025

                                                         CORAM

                           THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
                                              AND
                             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

                                              WA No. 215 of 2025
                                                     AND
                                          CMP Nos. 1470 & 1471 OF 2025



                K.Sivaraj
                                                                                       Appellant(s)

                                                              Vs

                1.Tahsildar
                Salem West Taluk,
                Suramangala,
                Salem 636 005

                2.Sail Refractory Company Limited
                (A Government of India Enterprise),
                (A Subsidiary Of SAIL),
                Post Bag No.565,
                Salem -636 005,
                Rep. By Its Chief Operating Officer.

                                                                                       Respondent(s)

                                                 WA No. 215 of 2025




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis              ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 03:47:22 pm )
                                                                                         WA No. 215 of 2025




                PRAYER
                To set aside the order made in W.P.No. 25606 / 2024 dated 20.09.2024 and the

                corrected order dated 03.10.2024.



                                                    WA No. 215 of 2025
                                  For Appellant(s):    Mr.V.Raghavachari, Senior
                                                       Counsel For Mr.S.Ayyathurai

                                  For Respondent(s):     Mr.Vadivelu Deenadayalan AGP
                                                         For R1
                                                         Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan ASGOI
                                                         Assist. By Mr.V.P.Raman For R2


                                                   JUDGMENT

(Judgment was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

The writ appeal has been instituted challenging the writ order dated

20.09.2024 passed in W.P.No.25606 of 2024.

2. The 2nd respondent filed a writ petition challenging the Peace

Committee proceedings of the Tahsildar, Salem West, dated 28.05.2024. The

proceedings were initiated due to a dispute between Group A and Group B

regarding access to the Raman Temple. The Tahsildar passed an order stating

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 03:47:22 pm )

that a pathway must be provided to reach said Temple. The said order came to

be challenged in the writ petition.

3. The Writ Court considered the merits and set aside the Peace

Committee proceedings and directed the Tahsildar to provide an alternate route

to the worshippers based on a rough sketch dated September 5, 2024, prepared

by the Town Surveyor, specifically the green-marked portion.

4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would

mainly contended that the alternate route has not been provided. However it is

disputed by the learned Additional Solicitor General of India appearing on

behalf of the 2nd respondent, who claimed that alternate route has been provided.

If at all it is not provided, the same is to be provided by the Tahsildar.

5. That apart, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant would contend

that the 2nd respondent company has got no legal right, and such rights of civil

nature cannot be determined in the Writ Proceedings nor in a Peace Committee

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 03:47:22 pm )

proceedings. If at all the appellant is of the opinion that the illegal mining is

going on and affecting the public rights or otherwise, he is at liberty to approach

the competent authority for initiation of further actions.

6. However, the writ petition has been filed challenging the Peace

Committee proceedings and the scope of the writ should not be expanded in the

writ appeal. Thus, the writ appeal is to be confined only to ensure that the

pathway is provided to reach the Raman Temple, which has been already

provided by the Writ Court by obtained necessary sketch from the competent

authority.

7. Thus, the worshippers are at liberty to use an alternate route already

provided for the purpose of reaching the Raman Temple and the Tahsildar may

ensure that such alternate route is protected enabling the worshippers to reach

the Temple in a peaceful manner.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 03:47:22 pm )

8. With these observations, the Writ Appeal Stands dismissed.

Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. There shall be

no order as to costs.

(S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.)(K.RAJASEKAR J.) 01-04-2025 Jeni Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No

1.The Tahsildar Salem West Taluk, Suramangalam, Salem 636 005

2.Sail Refractory Company Limited (A Government Of India Enterprise), (A Subsidiary Of SAIL), Post Bag No. 565, Salem -636 005, Rep.By Its Chief Operating Officer.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 03:47:22 pm )

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J. AND K.RAJASEKAR J.

Jeni

01-04-2025

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/04/2025 03:47:22 pm )