A.Boominathan vs The Superintendent of Police & Ors.

W.P.(MD).No.1400 of 2018 has been filed by one A.Boominathan, S/o.Andi Thevar to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to consider and dispose

of his representation, dated 11.01.2018. W.P.(MD).No.2509 of 2018 has been filed by one P.Rajangam, S/o.Periyakaruppan to direct the

respondents 1 to 3 to consider his representation, dated 01.02.2018 and permit him to conduct Masi Kalari Pooja and programmes i.e lifting

pooja boxes, firing crackers, drama and annathanam on 13.02.2018 and 14.02.2018 at Arulmigu Sundaravalliamman Temple, Thirumangalam,

Madurai District.

For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as described in W.P.(MD).No.1400 of 2018.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents and

the learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(MD).No.1400 of 2018 has submitted that there is a famous temple popularly called

Arulmigu Sundaravalliamman Thirukkovil situated at Sithalai Village, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District. The said temple is the ancient temple

and the same has been continuously managed by the petitioner''s ancestors namely Rajadhani Ooranda Oorappanoor Vadamalai Suntha Thevar

Vagaiyara. The Kumbabishegam function for the said temple was conducted in a grand manner in the last year by the petitioner and his pangalis

without any untoward incidents. The day-to-day accounts of the said temple are properly maintained and has been submitted to the Hindu

Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. This year, the Masi festival of the said temple is decided to be conducted on 13.02.2018 by

Rajadhani Ooranda Oorappanoor Vadamalai Suntha Thevar Vagaiyara and necessary arrangements, in this connection, also have been made by

them. Whileso, some of the enemical persons more particularly the nearby villagers in Sithalai, Melaurapanoor, Nallapillaipatti and Pungakulam,

who developed animosity over the growth and development of the temple under the administration of the petitioner, are now making serious

attempts to disturb the conducting of the Masi Festival on 13.02.2018. The rivalry groups of villagers are trying to conduct cultural activities and

other events on the same festival day without any permission. After coming to know of the said evil intention, in order to protect the temple, its

properties, lives of the devotees and pilgrims, who visit on the Masi Festival day, the aforesaid vagaiyara decided not to conduct any cultural

programs and other events like adal padal, drama etc., It is further submitted that if the rival groups from the nearby villages are permitted to

conduct cultural programs on the same day near the temple premises, it would cause serious danger to the precious human lives and resulting in

loss of properties and Government vehicles etc., He further submitted that in this regard, the petitioner sent a detailed representation to the

respondents on 11.01.2018 requesting them not to permit the above said rival group to conduct the cultural activities on the day of Masi Festival

on 13.02.2018, but, sofar, the said representation has not been considered. Hence, he has approached this court by way of this writ petition.

The learned counsel for the fourth respondent (Petitioner in W.P.(MD).No.2509/2018) has submitted that the said temple belongs to five

pangalis viz., 1.Sithalai Suntha Thevar vagaiyara (4th respondent herein) 2.Mela Urappanoor 3.Ooranda Urappanoor vagaiyara (the writ petitioner

herein) 4.Nallapillaipatti vagaiyara 5.Pungankulam (Sadachikoottam) vagaiyara. As per the above order, honour has been given to the pangalis.

Confirming the first honour and administration, on 11.02.2002, an agreement between the parties was executed, in which, the petitioner''s side also

signed. The fourth respondent was elected as President for temple from 19.02.2016, as per the minutes, dated 19.02.2016. In that minute also,

the petitioner''s side signed and accepted. The five pangalis used to collect donation from the respective vagaiyara and submit the accounts to the

President of the temple periodically in front of all pangalis. He further submitted that in the year 2017, five pangalis together conducted the

kumbabishegam to the said temple under the fourth respondent''s administration. After that, the four pangalis submitted accounts to the temple

administration. But the writ petitioner did not come forward to submit accounts and created unnecessary problems. He further submitted that they

have decided to conduct Masi kalari festival on 13.02.2018 and 14.02.2018 and during that festival, they have decided to conduct cultural

programmes etc., but with a view to stop the temple festival, the petitioner herein has filed the above writ petition and thereafter, submitted a

representation before the respondents 1 to 3 on 11.01.2018 requesting them not to grant permission to other pangalis for performing festival. The

respondents 1 to 3 with a view to settle the matter amicably forwarded the said representation to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Usilampatti. He

further submitted that the Revenue Divisional Officer has entrusted the matter to the Tahsildar and the Tahsildar, without making enquiry, has

prepared a letter stating that ""no temple festival, no crackers and no cultural programs"" shall be conducted by any of the parties and got signatures

from the parties under threat. He further submitted that the present issues raised by the writ petitioner are ''first honour'' and ''Temple

Administration'' and for that, both parties have to produce documentary evidence and oral evidence before the Civil Court. In respect of other

programs like lifting pooja boxes, firing crackers, music bands, lighting, annadhanam and cultural programmes, there is no dispute and hence, the

petitioner has submitted a representation before the respondents 1 to 3, dated 01.02.2018, based on the decision taken by the majority of the

pangalis seeking permission to conduct Masi Kalari Pooja and programs i.e lifting pooja boxes, firing crackers, drama and annadhanam. But the

respondents 1 to 3 have not passed any order in that representation and hence, he requests to give direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to reject the

petitioner''s representation and consider the representation submitted by the fourth respondent.

The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and 5 has submitted that since there was a dispute among the

pangalis with regard to the first honour and temple administration, the respondents 1 to 3 did not pass any order on the representations submitted

by both parties.

It is an admitted fact that the temple viz., Arulmighu Sundharavalliamman Thirukovil is a private temple and belongs to pangalis. According to the

petitioner, he is the hereditary trustee and he is continuously managing the affairs of the said temple. In order to show that he is the administrator of

the said temple, he is relying upon the auditor''s report of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. In the said report, at page

No.16, the auditor of the HR & CE Department has stated that at the time of auditing, the petitioner was staying in the said temple, but, he has not

produced any document to show that he has been appointed as administrator. He further stated that even if the petitioner has been appointed in the

social meeting, that should be approved by the Commissioner of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, but the petitioner

has not produced any document to show that he has been appointed as administrator of the said temple.

It is also to be pointed out that in the affidavit filed in support of the above writ petition, the petitioner has stated that in the last year, he has

conducted Kumbabishegam along with his pangalis. For that also, the petitioner has not produced any document. On the other hand, the fourth

respondent has filed a copy of the agreement said to have been executed between five pangalis on 11.02.2002. In the agreement, it is clearly

stated that how the temple has to be administered and in what order, the pangalis have to lift the pooja boxes etc., Though the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner has disputed the genuineness of the said document, in the absence of any other document with regard to the

administration of the temple, this Court is of the view that the said document can be taken into consideration.

It is also to be pointed that the fourth respondent has produced the pamphlets to show that all the five pangalis have jointly performed the Masi

Kalari Festival in the past. So, it appears that all the pangalis have jointly celebrated the Masi festival in the previous years and that being so, the

petitioner cannot claim exclusive right over the administration of the said temple. Further, the petitioner''s main objection is that if adal padal

program is allowed to conduct by the rival group, that would create law and order problem. Therefore, I am of the view that the respondent No.3

has to be directed to grant permission to the fourth respondent for conducting the Masi Kalari pooja festival along with other pangalis including the

petitioner in W.P.(MD).No.1400 of 2018 in the aforesaid temple, except for conducting cultural programs.

In the result, the respondent No.3 in W.P.(MD).No. 1400 of 2018 is directed to grant permission to the fourth respondent (Petitioner in W.P.

(MD).No.2509 of 2018) for conducting Masi Kalari Pooja, along with other pangalis including the petitioner in W.P.(MD).No.1400/2018 by

imposing reasonable conditions, except for conducting adal padal programme on 13.02.2018 and 14.02.2018 at Arulmigu Sundaravalliamman

Thirukovil, Thirumangalam, Madurai District. Adequate police protection also should be given. It is made clear that at the time of passing order,

the respondent No.3 has to keep in mind the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Church of God (Full Gospel) in India Vs K.K.R.Magestic

Colony Welfare Association and Others, reported in [(2000) 7 SCC 282]. Since the issues relating to ''first honour'' and ''temple administration''

have to be decided by the Civil Court, the parties are directed to approach the Civil Court and establish their rights and get appropriate reliefs. If

any such suit is filed, the civil court has to dispose of the same uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.