WP CRL.(MD)/5122/2026 of R.Raja Rinith Vs The District Collector on 11 September 2026

Order.

2. The Writ Petition in W.P.Crl.(MD)No.5122 of 2026 has been filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus seeking a direction to the respondents 2 and 4 to grant permission to install Vinayagar idol at Thattan Thoppu street near Arulmigu Sri Vazhikaatum Balamurugan Koil for worship at the time of Vinayagar Chathurthi festival on 14.09.2026 and immerse the same on 17.09.2026 in the sea near Karuppatti Muniyasamy temple as requested in petitioner's representation dated 01.09.2026.

3. The second writ petition WP.CRL.(MD). No.5202 of 2026 has been field seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned proceeding dated 09.09.2026 issued by the 4th respondent in br/K/M/vz;/8/fP/fh/t/,uhk/2026 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to grant permission to install Vinayagar idol at Thattan Thoppu street near Arulmigu Sri Vazhikaattum Balamurugan Koil for worship at the time of Vinayagar Chathurthi festival on 14.09.2026 and immerse the same on 17.09.2026 in the sea near Karuppatti Muniyasamy temple as requested in the petitioner's representation dated 01.09.2026.

4. As per the request made in the representation dated 01.09.2026, while the first Writ Petition was pending for consideration, the 4th respondent rejected the petitioner's representation dated 01.09.2026 by passing the impugned order in the second Writ Petition.

5. The first Writ Petition, WP.Crl.(MD) No.5122 of 2026 was listed on 10.09.2026 for consideration. At that time, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the request of the petitioner was rejected. Having come to know of the same, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is going to challenge the said rejection order and therefore, requested that the first Writ Petition may be kept pending and the same may be taken up along with the subsequent Writ Petition filed on the same issue.

6. Accordingly, the first Writ Petition, which had been adjourned, is taken on 11.09.2026. In the intervening period, the petitioner has filed the second Writ Petition WP.CRL.(MD). No. 5202 of 2026, challenging the impugned order dated 09.09.2026 passed by the 4th respondent rejecting the petitioner’s representation seeking permission for installation of the Vinayagar Idol, procession and immersion etc.,

7. During the course of submissions, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that the petitioner had decided to install the Vinayagar Idol in front of Arulmigu Sri VazhiKaattum Balamurugan Temple, which belongs to Hindu Nadar Uravin Murai Sangam, Thattan Thoppu Street, Keelakarai, Ramanathapuram District. Though the petitioner had decided to install the Vinayagar Idol in front of the said temple, the place where the Vinayagar Idol is proposed to be erected is a public street. In this regard, the Hindu Nadar Uravin Murai Sangam submitted an objection letter dated 10.09.2026 to the 4th respondent stating that the petitioner had not obtained any permission from the said Hindu Nadar Uravin Murai Sangam and that they had objection for the same. The impugned order was passed on the basis of a representation submitted by the petitioner. The contention in the writ petition is that the 4th respondent being the Inspector of Police has no power or authority under G.O. Ms. No.598, Public (Law and Order-B) Department, dated 09.08.2018 to decide the petitioner’s request. On the same ground, the impugned order in the second writ petition is set aside.

8. As per the said Government Order, the designated authority is the Revenue Divisional Officer of the area concerned, who is required to consider the Form-I application submitted by any person seeking permission to conduct the Vinayagar Chathurthi festival, including the erection of a Vinayagar idol, procession and immersion, etc.

In view of the said Government Order, four formalities are required to be complied by way of NOC or other arrangements for the place where the Vinayagar Idol is to be installed, electricity supply, NOC from the Fire and Rescue Services Department and NOC from the local police for procession and use of a sound system along with an amplifier. The said Government Order was tested before this Court in an earlier round of litigation in W.P.Crl.(MD) No.2243 of 2018 batch in the case of Vinayakar Sathurthi Madhiya Kuzhu Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Principal Secretary to Government, Public (Law and Order-B) Department and another. In the said case, held that the NOC from the Fire and Rescue Services Department was not at all required and certain other conditions in the said Government Order, namely,, Conditions Nos.13, 15 and 16, were set aside. Thereafter, the said Government Order was tested before another Coordinate Bench in W.P.Crl.(MD) No.1086 of 2025 batch, in the case of S. Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Police, Madurai City and another, by order dated 26.08.2025,

9. Taking note of the conditions stated in the Government Order and the other aspects, certain directions were issued by this Court. The case records reveal that, so far, the petitioner has not submitted the Form-I as per the G.O. Ms. No.598, Public (Law and Order-B) Department, dated 09.08.2018, which enables the Revenue Divisional Officer to consider the request of the public or any interested person seeking permission to conduct the Vinayagar Chathurthi festival including the procession and immersion. Though the case records reveal that the petitioner made a representation to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram on 01.09.2026 seeking permission to conduct the Vinayagar festival by erecting the idol, procession and immersion etc., and though the said representation was also forwarded to the other respondents in this case, the 2nd respondent namely the Revenue Divisional Officer, has not passed any order.

10. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, though the Form-I as per the G.O. Ms. No.598, Public (Law and

Order-B) Department, dated 09.08.2018 had not been given so far, the earlier representation given by the petitioner dated 01.09.2026 may be considered as Form-I. The argument of the learned counsel may appear attractive. However, even though this Court may accept it, as per the Government Order and subsequent judicial decisions, Form-I has to be submitted by the persons interested in seeking permission. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to submit Form-I along with required documents as per the aforesaid Government Order. During the course of the submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the place already decided for erecting the Vinayagar idol was objected by the Hindu Nadar Uravin Murai Sangam. If so, the petitioner may choose a private place and in this regard the owner of the private property shall provide an NOC. Let it be done so by the petitioner on its own.

11. As far as electricity is concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he will advise the petitioner to go for a private generator service for the purpose of electricity etc. For that he has to get a letter or NOC or order from the generator service

providers. Let it be done so.

12. As far as NOC to be issued by the local police is concerned, the facts reveal that no specific request have been given by the petitioner to the local police, who is the 4th respondent, seeking NOC to conduct the Vinayagar Chathurthi procession, immersion along with sound system amplifier etc.

13. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner in his strong voice submitted that, though the petitioner made a request for permission to conduct the festival, the police rejected the same by passing the impugned order. Though they know very well about the G.O.Ms.No.598, Public (Law and Order-B) Department, the police ought to have issued NOC to the petitioner, which would enable the petitioner to approach the Revenue Divisional Officer to obtain such permission for conducting the Vinayagar idol erection etc. When the Court enquired whether the petitioner had submitted any letter to the police seeking NOC, no such letter had been given so far. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, if the Court directs, the petitioner will give an application/petition on the same day. If the petitioner gives such a letter seeking an NOC to the 4th respondent, along with the submission of Form-I, the 4th respondent is directed to consider said letter immediately and issue the NOC at the earliest, so as to enable the petitioner to proceed further.

14. Taking note of all these aspects, the first Writ Petition W.P.Crl.(MD)No.5122 of 2026 has technically become infructuous and accordingly closed. The second Writ Petition W.P.Crl.(MD)No. 5202 of 2026 is disposed of by setting aside the impugned order, with the following directions: i) The petitioner is directed to submit the Form-I application to the Revenue Divisional Officer, who is the 2nd respondent herein, at the earliest along with the necessary enclosures as indicated and discussed above. ii) The petitioner is also directed to submit a request seeking NOC to the 4th respondent immediately. iii) If the petitioner submits such a request for NOC, the 4th respondent is directed to consider the NOC application and decide the same at the earliest, so as to enable the petitioner to proceed further with the submission of Form-I, wherein the scheduled programme is to be held on 14.09.2026.

15. With the above directions, both the Writ Petitions are disposed of and the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

11.09.2026 Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No psa

To

1. The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram Division, O/o. The District Collector, Ramanathapuram.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

4. The Inspector of Police, Keelakarai Police Station, Keelakarai Ramanathapuram District.

5. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai

DR. P. MURUGAN, J. psa

WP.CRL.(MD). Nos.5122 & 5202 of 2026 & WPMP.CRL.(MD). No. 1189 of 2026

11.09.2026