R. Ayyappan vs The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul and Others

R. Banumathi, J.—In this Writ Petition, filed as a Public Interest Litigation, the Petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the

Respondents from removing the structure of the village Temple, namely Kaliamman and Bhagavathiamman Temple, and also from cutting the trees,

aged more than 15 years, standing in the said temple, situated at Mullipadi Natham Survey No. 573/1, Settiyapatti Hamlet of Mullipadi Village,

Dindigul Taluk, Madurai District. Case of the Petitioner is that Kaliamman and Bhagavathiamman Temple is situated in the central place of

Settiyapatti Village and that the temple is there for more than 15 years. The grievance of the Petitioner is that Respondents 1 to 7, colluding with

Respondents 8 to 10, are trying to demolish the temple without following legal process or without any valid legal order in order to get illegal gain

from real estate businessmen and therefore he seeks for a Writ of Mandamus as afore stated.

We have heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader, who has taken notice on behalf of

Respondent Nos. 1 to 7.

Learned Additional Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that in respect of the dispute pertaining to the temple and shifting of the

temple, there was a law and order problem in the village, regarding which a Peace Committee Meeting was held on 18.06.2012 in the presence of

Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul, the 3rd Respondent herein. He would further submit that in the said Peace Committee Meeting, the Villagers,

comprised in two groups, namely ''A'' Group and ''B'' Group, participated and they have mutually agreed that the altar of the Temple (3-1/2 x 3-

1/2) would be removed on 19.06.2012 by 10.00 a.m. and that they have also agreed to remove the stones implanted around the temple. Learned

Additional Government Pleader also produced a copy of the Minutes recorded in the said Peace Committee Meeting and the relevant portion of

the Minutes reads as under:

It seems that in deviation of the Resolution passed in the Peace Committee Meeting, the villagers failed to remove the temple and the stones

implanted therein, which resulted in law and order problem. It is seen from the typed-set of papers produced by the learned Additional

Government Pleader, regarding the which is said to have taken place on 19.06.2012, a case was also registered in Crime No. 304 of 2012 u/s

101 Cr.P.C. on the file of Dindigul Taluk Police Station and in the said case, the Petitioner has been arrayed as Accused No. 8. The Petitioner

who filed this Public Interest Litigation has conveniently suppressed the factum of Peace Committee Meeting held on 18.06.2012 and the

subsequent law and order problem that arose on 19.06.2012 and filed this Public Interest Litigation. As such, we do not find any public interest

involved in this Writ Petition.

Time and again, it has been consistently held by the Supreme Court that public interest litigation is an effective weapon for delivery of social

justice to the citizen and that the said weapon is to be used with great care and circumspection - Neetu Vs. State of Punjab and Others, . In

Dattaraj Nathuji Thaware Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, , it has been held that only the person acting bonafide and having sufficient interest

in the proceeding of a public interest litigation would alone have a locus standi and could approach the Court to wipe out the tears of poor and

needy suffering from violation of fundamental rights but, not a person for personal gain or private profit or for political motive or or any oblique

consideration. A person should come to Court with clean hands and with clear mind and clear objective. The Court should not allow its process to

be abused for other consideration.

In the above circumstances, the Petitioner being an accused in the said case is not justified in filing this Pubic Interest Litigation suppressing all

the material facts. In such view of the matter, we are inclined to impose a cost of Rs. 2500/- which shall be paid by the Petitioner. The Writ

Petition is dismissed The Petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 2,500/- (Rupees two thousand and five hundred only) as costs to the Madras

High Court Legal Services Committee, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of

this order. Connected M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2012 are also dismissed.