[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
R.Dhanapal vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 25 March, 2026
W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1668 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 25.03.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1668 of 2026
R.Dhanapal ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State of Tamilnadu,
Rep. By, the Superintendent of Police,
Office of the Superintendent of Police,
Dindigul District.
2. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police,
Vedasandur Sub Division,
Dindigul District.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Vadamadurai Police Station,
Dindigul District.
4. The Tahsildar,
Vedasandur Taluk Office,
Dindigul District.
5. Ramasamy
6. Mothilal
7. Chinnaraj
8. Kubendran ... Respondents
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 06:39:05 pm )
W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1668 of 2026
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to grant
permission and provide adequate police protection for conducting temple
festival and cultural programme at Sri Arulmigu Vinayagar, Sri Kaliamman, Sri
Mariamman, Sri Muniyandi and Sri Karuppanaswamy Temple, S.Paraipatti
Village, Vedachandur Taluk, Dindigul District scheduled on 26.03.2026,
27.03.2026, 28.03.2026 and 29.03.2026 by considering the petitioner's
representation dated 23.03.2026 as per the temple festival conducted in the year
2025 in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Dr.R.Alagumani
For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar (R1 to R3)
Government Advocate (Crl.)
Mr.M.Muthumanikkam (R4)
Government Advocate (Civil)
Mr.R.M.Arun Swaminthan (R5)
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the respondents 1 to
4 to grant permission and provide adequate police protection for conducting
temple festival and cultural programme at Sri Arulmigu Vinayagar, Sri
Kaliamman, Sri Mariamman, Sri Muniyandi and Sri Karuppanaswamy Temple,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 06:39:05 pm )
S.Paraipatti Village, Vedachandur Taluk, Dindigul District, scheduled on
26.03.2026, 27.03.2026, 28.03.2026 and 29.03.2026 by considering the
petitioner's representation dated 23.03.2026 as per the temple festival
conducted in the year 2025 in accordance with law within the time stipulated by
this Court.
2. Heard the learned counsel on either side and carefully perused the
materials placed before this Court. Since no adverse order is proposed to be
passed against the respondents 6 to 8, notice to them is dispensed with.
3. The very same petitioner had earlier approached this Court seeking
identical relief for the previous year with regard to the same temple, and this
Court, by order dated 01.04.2025 in WMP (MD) No. 6863 of 2025 in WP (MD)
No. 9189 of 2025, passed the following order:-
“I heard Mr.G.Gomathisankar for the petitioner, Mr.A.Kannan,
learned Additional Government Pleader for the first respondent,
Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate for the respondents 2
and 3 and Mr.C.Prithiv Raj for the respondents 4 to 6.
2. The dispute relates to performance of festival at Arulmigu
Vinayagar, Sri Kaliamman, Sri Mariamman, Sri Muniyandi and Sri
Karuppanasamy Temple at S.Paraipatti Village, Vedasandur Taluk,
Dindigul District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 06:39:05 pm )
3. Prior to this Writ Petition, another Writ Petition came to be filed
before this Court in W.P.(MD).No.8647 of 2025. After hearing the State
respondents, this Court ordered the Writ Petition in the following terms:
“7.Since the cultural programme is scheduled to be held on
31.03.2025 and the time is also too short, though the peace
committee meeting is fixed today, without affecting the rights of the
parties in conducting the festival, this Court is inclined to direct the
respondents to consider the petitioner's representation in respect of
conducting cultural programme positively and also provide adequate
police protection for the said programme on 31.03.2025. If any rival
party want to conduct the programme on alternative date, the same
can also be considered sby the official respondents.”
4. A reading of the above order shows that this Court had directed
the respondents to permit conducting cultural programme and also to
provide adequate police protection for the said programme on 31.03.2025.
It is not in dispute that the cultural programme was held yesterday. The
problem that arises today is regarding the festival to be conducted from
01.04.2025 to 04.04.2025.
5. Mr.Gomathi Sankar pleads that the petitioner has been a Poosari
for Mariamman Temple for more than ten years. This plea is stoutly
resisted by the learned counsel for the contesting private respondents. The
status of the petitioner as “Oor Periya Pannai” is also in dispute.
6. The respondents 4 to 6 have, on previous occasions, celebrated
the festival for the aforesaid temples on different dates from those
celebrated by the writ petitioner. As an interim arrangement, I am inclined
to follow the same pattern for this year also. The petitioner claims that the
State respondents 1 to 3 are preventing the holding of the festival.
7. Mr.A.Kannan and Mr.M.Karunanithi in unison state that the State
respondents are not preventing anyone from celebrating the festival, but it
is the petitioner and the respondents 4 to 6, who are creating a problem for
the conduct of the festival.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 06:39:05 pm )
8. On account of the private dispute between the petitioner and the
respondents 4 to 6, the temple festival need not come to a grinding halt as
has happened last year.
9. Since the petitioner has already been permitted to hold the
function in terms of the order in W.P.(MD).No.8647 of 2025 dated
28.03.2025, I pass the following directions:
i. The petitioner herein, namely, R.Dhanapal (Petitioner in W.P.
(MD).No.8647 of 2025) is permitted to celebrate the festival from
01.04.2025 to 04.04.2025.
ii. The respondents 4 to 6 shall celebrate the festival between
06.04.2025 and 08.04.2025.
iii.As to who is the Poosari for the temple would have to be decided
by the jurisdictional Civil Court and not by the respondents 1 to 3.
iv.For the function to be celebrated by the writ petitioner, either he
or any other person appointed by him can perform the rights as Poosari.
The respondents 4 to 6 will not interfere with the same.
v. Similarly, for the function to be celebrated by the respondents 4 to
6, either they or any other person appointed by them shall function as a
Poosari and the writ petitioner will not interfere with the same.
vi.The respondents 1 to 3 shall ensure that both the functions
conducted by the petitioner as well as by the respondents 4 to 6 go on
smoothly. In case any mischievous element attempts to interfere with the
same, the respondents 1 to 3 shall swing into action and take necessary
steps to prevent any untoward incident from taking place.
10. This Writ Miscellaneous Petition is ordered in the above terms.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 06:39:05 pm )
4. In view of the above, this Court passes the following directions:-
i. The petitioner herein, namely, R.Dhanapal (petitioner in W.P.(MD).No.
8647 of 2025 & WP(MD)No.9189 of 2025) is permitted to celebrate the
festival from 26.03.2026 to 29.03.2026;
ii. The respondents 5 to 8 shall celebrate the festival between 03.04.2026
and 07.04.2026;
iii.The issue as to who is the Poosari for the temple would have to be
decided by the jurisdictional Civil Court and not by the respondents 1 to 4.
iv.For the function to be celebrated by the writ petitioner, either he or any
other person appointed by him can perform the rights as Poosari. The
respondents 5 to 8 will not interfere with the same.
v. Similarly, for the function to be celebrated by the respondents 5 to 8,
either they or any other person appointed by them shall function as a Poosari
and the writ petitioner will not interfere with the same.
vi.The respondents 1 to 4 shall ensure that both the functions conducted
by the petitioner as well as by the respondents 5 to 8 go on smoothly. In case
any mischievous element attempts to interfere with the same, the respondents 1
to 4 shall swing into action and take necessary steps to prevent any untoward
incident from taking place.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 06:39:05 pm )
5. This Writ Petition is ordered in the above terms.
25.03.2026
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
sm
Note: Issue order copy on 25.03.2026.
TO:-
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Office of the Superintendent of Police,
Dindigul District.
2. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police,
Vedasandur Sub Division,
Dindigul District.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Vadamadurai Police Station,
Dindigul District.
4. The Tahsildar,
Vedasandur Taluk Office,
Dindigul District.
5. The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 06:39:05 pm )
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
Sm
Order made in
Dated
25.03.2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/03/2026 06:39:05 pm )
