Madras High Court
Paulraj (Died) vs The District Collector on 10 March, 2025
Author: G.R.Swaminathan
Bench: G.R.Swaminathan
W.A.(MD)No.981 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 10.03.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
W.A.(MD)No.981 of 2022
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.7899 of 2022
Paulraj (Died)
T.Murugananda Prasad ... Appellant
(Appellant is suo motu substituted vide order
dated 10.03.2025 in W.A.(MD)No.981 of 2022
by GRSJ & MJRJ)
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Kanyakumari District,
Nagercoil.
2.The Sub Collector,
Padmanabhapuram,
Thuckalay,
Kanyakumari District.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 07:07:36 pm )
W.A.(MD)No.981 of 2022
4.The Executive Officer,
Pacode A Town Panchayat,
Vilavancode Taluk,
Kanyakumari District.
5. Y.Thangaraj ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent, to allow the
writ appeal and set aside the order dated 10-01-2022 in
W.P.(MD).No.11276 of 2020 on the file of this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.C.Kishore
For Respondents : Ms.P.B.Ahamed Yasmin Parvin,
Government Advocate for R1 to R3.
Mr.S.P.Maharajan,
Standing Counsel for R4.
Mr.S.C.Herold Singh for R5
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the court was delivered by G.R.Swaminathan, J.)
Heard both sides.
2.One Paulraj filed W.P.(MD)No.11276 of 2020 challenging the
proceedings dated 06.03.2020 issued by the District Collector,
Kanyakumari granting permission to reconstruct a church in the petition
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 07:07:36 pm )
mentioned site. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 10.01.2022
declined to interfere in the matter. Challenging the same, Paulraj filed
writ appeal. During the pendency of the writ appeal, Paulraj passed away
and the present appellant had come on record.
3.The prime contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is
that there is no material to show that the existing building was
functioning as a church for forty years as claimed by the District
Collector before this Court.
4.The learned counsel for the appellant is right in contention that
the District Collector has not adduced any material in support his
contention.
5.Be that as it may, the only requirement set out in the statute is
that the District Collector's prior permission must be obtained. In this
case, The District Collector's prior permission has been obtained. The
statutory requisite has been fulfilled. Vide order dated 05.03.2025 in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 07:07:36 pm )
W.A.(MD)No.1438 of 2022 (Rev.H.E.Chandra Kumar Vs.The District
Collector, Tirunelveli District), we have held that we would respect the
District Collector's opinion in the matter.
6.We are therefore of the view that interference with the impugned
order is not warranted. The writ appeal is dismissed. We direct the first
respondent to issue supplementary proceedings indicating the manner in
which, the church has to function so as not to cause any nuisance to the
members of the locality. No costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
(G.R.S. J.,) & (M.J.R. J.,)
10.03.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
ias
To:
1.The District Collector,
Kanyakumari District,
Nagercoil.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 07:07:36 pm )
2.The Sub Collector,
Padmanabhapuram,
Thuckalay,
Kanyakumari District.
3.The Superintendent of Police,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
4.The Executive Officer,
Pacode A Town Panchayat,
Vilavancode Taluk,
Kanyakumari District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 07:07:36 pm )
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
and
M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
ias
10.03.2025
(2/2)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/03/2025 07:07:36 pm )
