The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has today passed an interim order permitting the Hindu Munnani to hold protests at Pazhanganatham junction near the Thirupparankundram temple, after Writ Petitions were filed challenging the refusal of permission for the same and restrictions imposed by the Police.

The Division Bench of Dr. Justice G. Jayachandran and Justice Poornima ordered, "..regarding impugned orders, this Court is of the opinion that the issue could have been handled in a better way. However, fortunately, with the able assistance of the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Additional Advocate Generals, it has now been by consensus, the issue is substantially diffused and the organizers agreed to carry out their demonstration/protest at Pazhanganatham junction instead of Thirupparankundram temple 16 Kal Mandapam, which will avoid inconvenience to the devotees".

Advocates P.S.Palanivelayutham and T.R.Subramanian appeared for the Petitioners while Additional Advocate General J.Ravindran and Public Prosecutor Hasan Mohamed Jinnah appeared for the Respondents.

The protests were proposed in the context of disputes about the cave temple Thiruparankundram on "Skanda Hill". It is claimed by another community that the same is "Sikkandar Hill" as there is a Dargah on the hill. It is alleged that recently, the Chairman of the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board, who is also the MP representing Ramanathapuram constituency, K Navas Kani (IUML) went up to the Dargah with his followers and declared that the hill is a Waqf property.

After the Hindu Munnani announced protests, the District Collector, on the opinion given by the Commissioner of Police, had passed a prohibitory order for two days, the 3rd and 4th of February. It was the contention of the Petitioner in one Writ Petition that the restrictions imposed by the Police prevented devotees from celebrating the ongoing "TheppaThiruvaza" festival of the Temple.

The Petitioner contended, "... the State beefed up the Security and deployed an unprecedented number of policemen/officers and imposed several curtail measures. Conveyance to Tirupparankundramis restricted. Tourist van operators are also restrained to ply with public to Tirupparankundram. The Mandapam owners were ordered not to give any booking without police permission. ... the pilgrims have to go to police station first to get a 'pass' and thereafter to visit Lord Muruga temple..".

While noting that the situation could have been handled in a better way, the Court also observed that the right of expression should always be subject to public peace and other restrictions imposed by the Constitution.

"The respondent Police agreed to provide proper arrangement and protection for the demonstration at Pazhanganatham junction between 5.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m. today", the Court recorded.

The Court imposed certain conditions on the protests:

  • Demonstrators shall not carry more than one megaphone and protests must be peaceful.
  • No provocative slogans shall be raised which may cause disturbance to the public peace and tranquillity.
  • The agitation should be fully video-graphed.
  • The organizers should permit the Police to videograph the agitation without any interference or protest.

The Court also ordered that the Writ Petitioners would be responsible for the peaceful conduct of the demonstration.

The Court has listed the matter for further hearing on 19 February 2025.

Appearance:

Petitioners: Advocates P.S.Palanivelayutham, Ananth C.Rajesh, P.Subbiah, T.R.Subramanian, D.Dilip Kumar

Respondents: Additional Advocate General J.Ravindran, Government Pleader P.Thilak Kumar, State Public Prosecutor Hasan Mohamed Jinnah, Additional Public Prosecutor S.Ravi

Cause Title: M.Murugan v. The District Collector, Madurai District

Click here to read/download Order


Madras High CourtJustice G. JayachandranJustice R. Poornima

Verdictum News Desk