Vijayakumar vs The District Collector and The Superintendent of Police

G. Rajasuria, J.—This writ petition has been filed to direct the first respondent to permit the petitioner''s village to conduct the religious Jallikattu @ Manjuvirattu on 02.01.2009 or any other subsequent date and consequently direct the second respondent to give sufficient police protection in the eve of Arulmigu Sri Nallandi Ayyanar Temple of Venthanpatty Village, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District of peaceful manner based on the representation given by the petitioner dated 04.12.2008 and 15.12.2008.

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and also Mr. D.Sasikumar, learned Government Advocate, who took notice on behalf of the respondents.

The long and short of the grievance of the petitioner as found set out in the affidavit accompanying the writ petition as well as from the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, is to the effect that when the petitioner approached the first respondent viz., the District Collector, Pudukottai District, with representations dated 04.12.2008 and 15.12.2008 seeking permission to conduct the Jallikattu @ Manjuvirattu on 02.01.2009 at Sri Nallandi Ayyanar Temple of Venthanpatty Village, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District, the first respondent; but there is no positive response. Hence, this writ petition.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner citing the decision in Rasu Mazhavarayar v. District Collector, Pudukkottai and Anr. reported in (2008) 5 MLJ 512, would develop his argument that the Division Bench of this Court permitted such Jallikattu to be conducted during the months of March and April also. An excerpt from it, would run thus:

It is not in dispute that a Division Bench of this Court, vide its order dated 09.04.2007, in W.P (MD) No. 3214 of 2007, has granted permission to conduct "Manjuvirattu" during the months of March and April but subject to strict adherence to certain guidelines and admittedly, this order has not been taken on appeal and as such, has become final. Our anxious attention has been drawn to yet another Division Bench order dated 16.04.207 in W.P (MD) No. 3510 of 2007 in which when a similar request was put forward, this Court has remanded the matter to the competent authority to take a decision at an early date to consider the claim of the petitioner for conduct of the sport event.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner also citing another decision of this Court in K.Madhavan v. District Collector, Salem and Ors. reported in (2008) 8 MLJ 417, would develop his argument that the Division Bench of this Court permitted such Jallikattu to be conducted and ordered police pickets also. An excerpt from it, would run thus:

We therefore, permit the event to be held strictly on the condition that the bull or any other animal which is being worshipped shall not be subjected to any acts of cruelty and it shall not in any way violate the provision of Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. We direct the District Collector, Salem to take adequate steps to ensure compliance with our order by, if necessary, posting police pickets in the said area.

Heard both sides.

Hence, in these circumstances, I would like to pass the following direction:

The first respondent viz., the District Collector, Pudukottai District, Pudukottai is directed to consider the representations and grant permission subject to same terms and conditions as specified by the Division Bench of this Court in Rasu Mazhavarayar v. District Collect or, Pudukkottai and Anr. reported in (2008) 5 MLJ 512 and in K. Madhavan v. District Collector, Salem and Ors. reported in (2008) 8 MLJ 417.

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs.