WP CRL.(MD)/5114/2026 of Esakki Vs The Revenue Divisional Offic on 10 September 2026

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.

3. The Inspector of Police, Tenkasi Town, Police Station, Tenkasi District ... Respondents PRAYER :- Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or order or direction particularly in the nature of Writ, directing the respondents herein to grant permission to conduct Vinayagar Sathurthi Festival on 14.09.2026 by erecting Vinayagar Statue in front of Arulmigu Mottaiyan Vinayagar Temple at Harihara Vinayagar Kovil Street, Tenkasi District based on the petitioner's representation dated 16.08.2026. For Petitioner : Mr. R.J. Karthick

For Respondents : Mr. A. Sivasubramanian Additional Government Pleader for R1. Mr. D. Rajaboopathy, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for R2 and R3. WP.CRL.(MD). No.5128 of 2026 S.Murugan

... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.

3. The Inspector of Police Tenkasi Town Police Station, Tenkasi District.

... Respondents PRAYER :- Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or order or direction particularly in the nature of Writ, directing the respondents herein to grant permission to conduct Vinayagar Sathurthi festival by erecting Vinayagar Statue in front of Arulmigu sudalaimadaswamy temple situated in Mathankovil 2nd street, Tenkasi based on the petitioner's representation dated 16.08.2026. For Petitioner : Mr. R.J. Karthick

For Respondents : Mr. A. Sivasubramanian Additional Government Pleader for R1. Mr. C. Susikumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for R2 and R3.

C O M M O N O R D E R

Heard both sides.

2. Mr. A. Sivasubramani. Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the 1st respondent and Mr. D. Rajaboopathy, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) takes notice for 2nd and 3rd respondents in WP.CRL.(MD). No.5114 of 2026 and Mr. C. Susikumar, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) takes notice for the respondents 2 and 3 in WP.CRL.(MD). No.5128 of 2026.

3. Both the Writ Petition prayers are the same, seeking permission to erect the Vinayagar statue in front of the Arulmigu Mottaiyan Vinayagar Temple at Harihara Vinayagar Kovil Street, Tenkasi District, for the Vinayagar Sathurthi festival which falls on 14.09.2026 and in WP.CRL.(MD). No.5128 of 2026 is also sought to erect the Vinayagar statue in front of Arulmigu Sudalaimadaswamy temple situated at Mathankovil 2nd Street, Tenkasi District, based on the representations dated 16.08.2026

submitted by the respective petitioner's.

4. Since, both the cases involves the same relief in the same area, though in separate streets in Tenkasi Town, with the consent of both the sides both the cases have been taken up together for common disposal.

5. The learned Additional Government Pleader, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) and the learned counsel for the petitioner elaborately argued the case by referring to G.O. Ms. No.598 public (Law & Order-B) Department dated 09.08.2026, the decision of this Court in a batch of case in WP. No.26439 of 2018 [Vinayagar Chathurthi Mathiya Kulu Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and others] dated 15.03.2023 and another batch of decision in WP.Crl.(MD)No.1086 of 2025 [S. Kumar Vs. The Commissioner of Police, Madurai and another] dated 26.08.2025.

6. In the first decision, this Court modified and set aside certain conditions imposed regarding the erection of Vinayagar idols, worship, procession and immersion. Based on the Government Order and the judicial decision of this Court, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that, the designated authorities of the city are the Assistant Commissioner of Police and for rural the Revenue Division Officer or Sub-Collector. The facts reveals, the petitioner's in both the cases submitted that, Form-1 as prescribed under the Government Order referred to above, had been submitted to the Revenue Division Officer who is the designated authority for consideration and issuing Form-2 for erection of Vinayagar idol procession, immersion.

7. As per the decision of this Court, the Government Order has been modified and set aside. However, No Objection Certificate from the land owner and No Objection Certificate from the Station House Officers i.e. police officer is to be attached with Form-1. If the petitioner satisfied those two conditions the Revenue Division Officer will take a final decision and issue Form-2, if it is in order. To that aspect the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted and restricted the prayer in both the cases to the effect that instead of erection of idol in front of the temple, now the petitioner come forward to fix the idol inside the temple that means within the campus of the temple. The facts reveal that idol may be up to 10 feet as per the affidavit. Now the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) is taken note of and instead of 10 feet idol height the petitioner may reduce it depending upon the temple size from 5 feet to 7 feet.

8. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners in both the cases, who is the same counsel, submitted that the petitioners shall not erect Vinayagar idols outside or immediately opposite to the temple and both Vinayagar idol will be erected within the temple premises. The learned counsel further submitted that, in such circumstances, a No Objection Certificate from the landowner or the Corporation/Municipal Department is not required. Since, the Vinayagar idol is to be fixed inside the temple premises, there is no requirement for “No Objection Certificate” from the police officer cannot be accepted by this Court, for the reasons, as per the said Government Order “No Objection Order” from the Station House Officer of the area concerned, including the sound amplifier license permission has to be given. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the interest of the petitioner in both the cases is only to celebrate the festival by worshiping the Vinayagar idol even without any sound system amplifier permit order.

9. For granting permission for worship, followed by procession and immersion, this Court is of the view that a “No Objection Certificate” from the concerned police officer is necessary, particularly with regard to the procession and immersion. To that aspect the petitioner counsel submitted that, though the “No Objection Certificate” from the police officer has not been attached to the Form-1 submitted to the Revenue Division Officer, this Court may direct the Revenue Division Officer to consider the Form-1 application. In the mean time, the petitioner may subject to get the “No Objection Certificate” from the Station House Officer of the area concerned. Once the petitioner submits the “No Objection Certificate” from the area police station concerned let the Revenue Division Officer may decide the Form-1 application in a positive manner taking note of the sentiments of the larger people in the area.

10. During the course of the submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner persuaded the learned Government Advocate, requesting to advice the police to expedite the “No Objection Certificate” for the procession and immersion of Vinayagar idol. Having the request made by the petitioner's counsel, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that, the procession route is decided by the police and the same should be accepted by the petitioner, he will instruct the police to issue “No Objection Certificate” out of the procession route decision and the petitioner should not object or take a different view for procession. To that aspect, the learned counsel for the petitioner accepted that whatever be the route given by the police will be followed by the petitioner and go ahead with the procession and immersion of the Vinayagar idol in the specified area.

11. Recording the above aspects of both the cases, the Revenue Division Officer of the Tenkasi, is directed to consider both the petitioner's Form-1 application at the earliest and issue orders by taking note of the above observation of this Court.

12. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. 10.09.2026 Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No

psm To

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.

2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.

3. The Inspector of Police, Tenkasi Town, Police Station, Tenkasi District

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

DR. P. MURUGAN, J.

psm

WP. CRL.(MD) No.5114 & 5128 of 2026 10.09.2026