Madras High Court
Panar Kula Thaiyarkarargal Sangam vs The District Collector on 10 March, 2025
W.P.(MD)No.6573 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 10.03.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
W.P.(MD)No.6573 of 2025
Panar Kula Thaiyarkarargal Sangam,
rep., by its President,
Thirukkumaran Nagar,
Thirunagar, Madurai-625 006. ... Petitioner
vs.
1.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Sattur, Virudhunagar District.
3.The Tahsildar,
Vembakottai Taluk,
Virudhunagar District.
4.S.Muthukumar ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the third respondent to
hand over the key of Arulmigu Kathavarayan Kamba Kamakshi Temple,
1/13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 08:12:02 pm )
W.P.(MD)No.6573 of 2025
Sankaramoorthypatti, Alangulam, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District,
to enable the petitioner sangam to conduct the festival from 14.03.2025
to 16.03.2025.
For Petitioner :Mr.M.Saravanan
For R1 to R3 :Mr.S.Shaji Bino
Special Government Pleader
For R4 : Mr.J.Barathan
for Mr.Mr.Sheenivasan K
*****
ORDER
This writ petition seeks for mandamus to direct the Tahsildar,
Vembakottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District, to hand over the keys of
“Arulmighu Kathavarayan and Kamba Kamakshiamman Temple”,
situated at Sankaramoorthypatti, Alangulam, Sivakasi Taluk,
Virudhunagar District, to enable the petitioner Sangam to conduct 'khrp'
festival from 14.03.2025 to 16.03.2025 and for consequential orders.
2. The case of the petitioner is that in Sankaramoorthypatti Village,
there is a temple dedicated for the worship of “Arulmighu Kathavarayan
and Kamba Kamakshiamman”. The petitioner pleads that the said deity
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 08:12:02 pm )
is the Fynja;tk; of Panar community. According to them, the temple
was constructed by the members of Panar community and they have been
in management of the same for years on end.
3.They pleaded that one Karuppaiah sought to interfere with the
conduct of festival, constraining the then President of the Sangam, one
Paramanandam to institute a suit before the Additional District Munsif
Court at Sattur. This suit in O.S.No.93 of 1985 was one for bare
injunction. It came to be decreed on 27.04.1987. Aggrieved by the said
judgment and decree, Karuppaiah preferred a regular appeal in A.S.No.64
of 1987. The appeal came to be allowed by a judgment and decree dated
23.08.1988. Against the reversal of the judgment and decree, a second
appeal was preferred before this Court in S.A.No.296 of 1989.
4. Pending the second appeal, the original defendant Karuppaiah
passed away and one Saravanan was brought on record. The said second
appeal was allowed and the suit was remanded to the trial Court on
07.06.2011. There was a direction to the learned Additional District
Munsif at Sattur, to frame an additional issue whether the earlier suits
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 08:12:02 pm )
with respect to the same temple in O.S.No.69 of 1981 and O.S.No.85 of
1978 would operate as a bar for the subsequent suit.
5. At this stage, I should point out that O.S.No.69 of 1981 and
O.S.No.85 of 1978 had been dismissed for default. After the remand, the
suit in O.S.No.93 of 1985 was renumbered as O.S.No.13 of 2013 on the
file of the District Munsif Court, Sivakasi. Pursuant to the directions
given by this Court in C.R.P(PD)(MD).No.2692 of 2018, another suit
filed in O.S.No.229 of 2012 was permitted to be withdrawn. In the
meantime, the petitioner in W.P(MD).No.6457 of 2025, namely,
Mr.S.Muthukumar presented a suit in O.S.No.32 of 2012 claiming to
represent all the four communities in the Village, namely Panar, Servai,
Thondaiman and Semman. He was successful in obtaining an interim
order, which was challenged before this Court by way of a revision.
Interim orders were obtained in the said revision. Thereafter, O.S.No.32
of 2012 came to be withdrawn.
6. The insatiable appetite for litigation of these four communities is
evident from the facts. The renumbered suit in O.S.No.13 of 2013 came
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 08:12:02 pm )
to be decreed, against which, the said Muthukumar preferred an appeal in
A.S.No.28 of 2016. Similarly, as against the judgment and decree in
O.S.No.229 of 2012 (it had been withdrawn subsequently), an appeal was
preferred in A.S.No.23 of 2016. The original defendant, who was
impleaded as representing the Panar; community, namely,
Mr.Paramanandam passed away. Instead of impleading another person
from the same community to represent the interest of the body, the said
Muthukumar impleaded his daughter Thenammal @ Thenmozhi as a
party to the suit. The said Thenammal had no objection for the suit
preferred against her father to be decreed and the suit presented by him
came to be dismissed. Consequently, the learned Subordinate Judge
allowed the appeals in A.S.Nos.23 and 28 of 2016.
7. Before I proceed to narrate what finally happened in the second
appeals, I have to point out that on the strength of the decree obtained in
A.S.No.23 of 2016, before the Subordinate Judge, Sivakasi; Muthukumar
presented a writ petition in W.P(MD).No.3894 of 2022 seeking a
direction to the Tahsildar to hand over the keys of the temple to him for
celebrating the 'khrp' festival. This writ petition was disposed of in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 08:12:02 pm )
admission stage giving a direction to the Tahsildar to consider the
representation made by the petitioner and pass final order within two
days, after giving an opportunity to the petitioner.
8. The Tahsildar constituted a Peace Committee and passed a
resolution on 07.03.2022 permitting Muthukumar to perform the festival
between 03.03.2022 and 18.03.2022 with a temporary Poosari and hand
over the keys of the temple back to the Village Administrative Officer,
Alangulam, on 19.03.2022.
9. On coming to know of the judgment and decree in A.S.No.23 of
2016, the writ petitioner moved two second appeals in S.A.(MD)No.209
of 2022 and C.M.A(MD).No.366 of 2023. Both the appeals were
allowed on 04.03.2024 setting aside the judgment and decree and
remitting the matter to the trial Court for fresh disposal.
10. By virtue of this judgment and decree, parties have been
restored to the situation prior to the order passed by the learned
Subordinate Judge at Sivakasi. However, in the meantime, another suit
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 08:12:02 pm )
in O.S.No.12 of 2017 came to be presented seeking for declaration that
all the aforesaid four communities are entitled to manage the temple. By
virtue of the order passed by this Court, O.S.No.12 of 2017 was
transferred to the file of the learned Additional District Judge,
Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District.
11. An application for injunction was taken out by Mr.Muthukumar
and others seeking to restrain the Poosari, namely, Peyandi, from
interfering with the rights of management and also preventing him from
interfering with the right to offer prayer.
12. The learned Principal District Judge at Virudhunagar by order
dated 06.04.2018, rejected the prayer for insofar as it related to the
management, but granted an order restraining the Poosari, Peyandi, from
preventing any person to offer prayer in the temple.
13. With every 'khrp' festival, a dispute is commenced between the
parties.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 08:12:02 pm )
14. The present writ petition before me seeks for the relief of
handing over the keys to Peyandi for the purpose of performing the
poojas during the ensuing 'khrp' festival between 14.03.2025 to
16.03.2025.
15. I heard Mr.M.Saravanan for the petitioner, Mr.S.Shaji Bino,
learned Special Government Pleader for the respondent 1 to 3 and
Mr.J.Barathan representing for Mr.Sheenivasan for the fourth respondent.
16. Mr.Saravanan reiterated the contentions raised in the affidavit.
17. Mr.J.Barathan pleaded by virtue of the order passed by the
learned Principal District Judge, in I.A.No.45 of 2017 in O.S.No.12 of
2017, dated 06.04.2018, the right to worship of the four communities
should not be prevented.
18. Mr.S.Shaji Bino points out that the keys were taken from the
poosari and have been retained under the control of the Tahsildar, on
account of the repeated disputes, that have been arising between the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 08:12:02 pm )
members of the community and also in order to maintain the law and
order and peace in the area. He states the Peace Committee dated
07.03.2022, which took over the keys from the Poosai, was formed only
pursuant to the orders of this Court. He also points out that Peyandi is
the poosari of the temple.
19. I have carefully considered the submissions of all the sides.
20. The existence of the temple is not in dispute. The various suits
that have been filed by one party as against the other, vying to control the
temple is also not in dispute. The fourth respondent in the writ petition
managed to obtain a decree before the Subordinate Judge, Sivakasi, and
thereby, took over the keys of the temple by getting an order to hold a
Peace Committee Meeting. When the basis of getting that order, namely,
the judgment and decree of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Sivakasi, has
been set aside in second appeal, automatically parties have to stand
restored to the position, they were prior to the judgment and decree.
Hence, Peyandi, the Poosari, gets the rights to perform the prayer in the
temple. Whether he is entitled to continue in that capacity depends upon
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 08:12:02 pm )
the judgment and decree to be passed by the learned District Judge at
Virudhunagar, in O.S.No.12 of 2017 and O.S.No.324 of 2024.
21. Devotees cannot wait till the disputes are settled by the civil
Court. The 'khrp' festival is round the corner. The sentiments of the
faithful devotees will have to be taken into consideration by this Court at
the time of passing an order. Therefore, while rejecting the wide prayer
that Mr.Saravanan seeks for, I am inclined to pass the following
directions:-
(i) The third respondent/Tahsildar, Vembakottai Taluk,
shall hand over the keys to Mr.Peyandi, the Poosari of the
temple;
(ii) Mr.Peyandi will be entitled to act as Poosari and
conduct the festival in the usual customary manner between
14.03.2025 to 16.03.2025;
(iii) The temple shall be kept open on all the three days
without one party preventing the other from offering worship
in the temple;
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 08:12:02 pm )
(iv) The Revenue and the Police authorities incase they
get an information that one party is preventing the other from
offering prayers, they shall immediately act and remove the
said mischievous element from the temple;
(v) After the festival is over, the key will be handed over
to the Village Administrative Officer, Alangulam,
Virudhunagar District.
(vi) For other auspicious days, the keys shall be
handed over to Mr.Peyandi and once the prayers during New
Moon and Full Moon had been completed, he shall hand over
the keys back to the Village Administrative Office, Alangulam.
(vii) Incase Mr.Peyandi plays truant and does not open
the temple, the revenue authorities, after giving him a due
opportunity to perform his duty and if he refuses to do so,
shall call upon one Periyasamy and Murugan, relatives of
Peyandi to perform the religious functions.
22. This order shall not be construed as a benefit in favour of
Peyandi or against Muthukumar. The civil Court shall decide the issue as
to who is entitled to manage the temple uninfluenced by this order. This
arrangement is made only for the purpose of ensuring that the 'khrp'
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 08:12:02 pm )
festival of the temple is performed uninterruptedly, so that the sentiments
of the worshippers being affected.
23. In result, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
Index :Yes / No 10.03.2025
Internet :Yes / No
NCC :Yes / No
Rmk
To
1.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Sattur, Virudhunagar District.
3.The Tahsildar,
Vembakottai Taluk,
Virudhunagar District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 08:12:02 pm )
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
Rmk
10.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 08:12:02 pm )
