Madras High Court
P.N. Ramesh Babu vs The Deputy Superintendent Of Police on 6 April, 2016
Author: P.N. Prakash
Bench: P.N. Prakash
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 06.04.2016
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.N. PRAKASH
Writ Petition (MD) Nos.3661 of 2016 and 3880 of 2016
and Contempt Petition(MD) No.255 of 2016
W.P.(MD)No.3661 of 2016
P.N. Ramesh Babu ... Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Theni District, Theni.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Veerapandi Police Station, Theni.
3. P. Milany
4. P. Mathan
5. P. Veeramani ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue of a writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents
1 and 2 from passing any orders from reopening the Arulmigu Sikkumallammal
Temple, Kattunayakkanpatti, Theni District to fix a date for worship and
celebrate the temple festival by violating the customary rights and practice.
W.P.(MD)No.3880 of 2016
P. Milany ... Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Theni District, Theni.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Theni District, Theni.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Veerapandi Police Station, Theni.
4. Ramesh Babu ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for
all records of the second respondent made on 19.2.2016 and quash the same and
direct the respondents 1 and 2 to grant permission and provide necessary
protection to the petitioner and their community members to worship and
celebrate their annual festival at Arulmighu Sikkumallammal Temple,
Kattunayaganpatti, Theni District in the month of February or thereafter by
giving permission giving 7 dyas time for the petitioner to observe fasting
penance and other rituals on the basis of his representation dated 21.2.2016.
Cont.P.(MD)No.255 of 2016
P. Milany ... Petitioner
-vs-
M. Cheemaichamy,
Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Theni District, Theni. ... Respondent / Contemnor
Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court
Act, 1971, with a prayer to punish the respondent for contempt of disobeying
Court order in W.P.(MD)No.2420 of 2016 dated 4.2.2016.
For Petitioner in WP(MD).3661/2016 : Mr.S.Subbiah
for Mr.S.Sukumar
For Petitioner in WP(MD)3880/2016; : Mr.M.Joseph Thatheus Jerome
Petitioner in Cont.P.(MD)No.255/2016;
& RR-3 to 5 in WP(MD).3661/2016
For RR-1 & 2 in WP(MD).3661/2016; : Mr.D.Muruganantham,
RR-1 to 3 in WP(MD).3880/2016 & Addl. Government Pleader
Respondent in Cont.P.(MD).255/2016
C O M M O N O R D E R
When spirituality takes the back seat, religion becomes the theatre of war.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred to as 'Milani group' and 'Ramesh Babu group'.
3. The dispute between the two groups is with regard to the conduct of festival in Arulmigu Sikkumallammal Temple, Kattunayakkanpatti, Theni (hereinafter referred to as 'the Temple'). The Temple is a village temple, where people belonging to all the castes including Dalits, worship and conduct the annual festival in the Tamil month of Thai (between 15th January and 15th February). Milani group belong to Okkalika, which is a sect of caste Hindus, and not Dalits.
4. Milani group filed W.P.(MD)No.2420 of 2016 seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the Police to provide adequate police protection to their group for worship and celebration of the annual festival of the Temple on 7.2.2016 and 8.2.2016. It was contended by Milani group that Ramesh Babu group are preventing them from celebrating the Temple festival. Ramesh Babu was not made as party in W.P.(MD)No.2420 of 2016 and only the Police were arrayed as respondents. After hearing the learned Counsel for Milani and the learned Additional Government Pleader, this Court passed the following order on 4.2.2016:
"3. Learned Additional Government Pleader submits that police have not received the representation dated 12.01.2016, purported to have been given by the petitioner. He also submits that on account of rival claims between the parties, the respondent police have registered several cases under Section 107 Cr.P.C. in Crime Nos.17, 18, 28 and 29 of 2016 and therefore, the situation is very volatile in the area.
4. Be that as it may, the petitioner is directed to approach the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Theni Sub-Division and submit a representation and on such representation being submitted, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Theni Sub-Division shall examine the same and conduct enquiry with both sides and explore the possibilities of amicable settlement by permitting both the parties to worship in the Temple on two different dates.
5. With the above direction, this writ petition stands closed. No costs."
5. On 6.2.2016, the Tahsildar, Theni convened a peace meeting, in which representatives of all the communities attended, except Milani group. There was overall support by all the communities to conduct the festival under the leadership of Ramesh Babu, and therefore, the Tahsildar permitted the conduct of the Temple festival on 08.02.2016 and 09.02.2016 by all the communities. Accordingly, on 08.02.2016, the Temple festival was celebrated by all the communities in unison except Milani group, which stayed away.
6. On coming to know of the order dated 4.2.2016 passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.2420 of 2016, on the petition filed by Milani, Remesh Babu filed W.P.(MD)No.3661 of 2016 seeking a writ of mandamus forbearing the Police from opening the Temple for the conduct of festival by Milani group.
7. While so, M.Cheemaichamy, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Theni Sub-Division, convened a peace meeting on 19.2.2016, which was attended by both Ramesh Babu group and Milani group. In the peace meeting, Milani group insisted that since they did not create any trouble on 8.2.2016, when Ramesh Babu group conducted the festival, they should be given permission to conduct the festival on 21.2.2016 and 22.2.2016. This was strongly objected to by Ramesh Babu group, because according to them, there can be only one festival in a year for the temple, which was over on 8.2.2016, where all the communities participated, and therefore the Temple cannot be opened again specially for Milani group to conduct a separate festival on 21.2.2016 and 22.2.2016. The Deputy Superintendent of Police passed an order dated 19.2.2016 rejecting the request of Milani group on the ground that there is every likelihood of serious law and order problem, if permission is granted to them. Aggrieved by the said order dated 19.2.2016, Milani group has filed W.P.(MD)No.3880 of 2016. Milani group has also filed Contempt Petition (MD)No.255 of 2016 alleging that M.Cheemaichamy, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Theni Sub-Division has violated the order dated 4.2.2016 passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.2420 of 2016.
8. Heard Mr.M.Joseph Thatheus Jerome, learned Counsel appearing for Milani group; Mr.S.Subbiah, learned counsel appearing for Ramesh Babu group; and Mr.D.Muruganantham, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the State.
9. Let me first address the contempt petition. It is alleged by Milani group that the Deputy Superintendent of Police has violated the order dated 4.2.2016 in W.P.(MD)No.2420 of 2016 by colluding with Ramesh Babu group, by passing the order dated 19.2.2016 denying Milani group the permission to conduct the festival. I find no transgression of the order dated 4.2.2016 by the alleged contemnor. As directed by this Court, the Deputy Superintendent of Police convened a meeting of both the groups, by which time Ramesh Babu group had already celebrated the festival along with all communities, including dalits, on 8.2.2016, pursuant to the order dated 6.2.2016 passed by the Tahsildar, which meeting was boycotted by Milani group. The perception of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, if Milani group is permitted to conduct festival on 21.2.2016 and 22.2.2016, there will be law and order problem, cannot be a ground for saying that he has committed an act of contempt. At the end of the day, it is the police officers at the ground level, who are the best persons to decide about the law and order issues, and this Court cannot sit on appeal over their judgments of the ground reality. Hence, I find that the alleged contemnor has not breached the order of this Court dated 4.2.2016 in any manner and accordingly the contempt petition is dismissed.
10. Coming to W.P.(MD)Nos.3661 and 3880 of 2016, Mr.M.Joseph Thatheus Jerome placed strong reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in (2016) 2 SCC 725 (Adi Saiva Sivachariyargal Nala Sangam v. Government of Tamil Nadu) and of this Court in WP(MD)No.11071 of 2012 dated 30.8.2012 to contend that a majority group cannot flex its muscles and prevent a minority group from conducting the temple festival. He submitted that the constitutional court should come to the rescue of the minority group in order to protect their fundamental right to worship.
11. Though the said argument did appear forceful, yet it begs the question about the existence of a right of Milani group to conduct the Temple festival on the dates of their choice. The learned Counsel clothed his arguments by submitting that Milani group cannot be prevented from worshiping in the temple, as it would amount to promotion of untouchability.
12. To recapitulate, the temple is not an H.R.&C.E. Temple. It is a village temple, which is said to be located in a desolate place. The temple is opened by the villagers during the month of Thai and after celebrating the festival, the temple is locked and the keys are left with the Poojari. Ramesh Babu group never prevented Milani group from participating in the festival like all others, including dalits, who were part of the festival on 8.2.2016. As stated above, Milani group do not belong to dalits, and they are a sect of caste hindus. If Milani group have a right of their own to open the temple and conduct the celebration, the same has to be established only before a civil Court, and not before the Constitutional Court.
13. In Adi Saiva Sivachariyargal Nala Sangam case (supra), Chidambaram Temple was taken over by the Government through HR&CE Department and in those circumstances, the Constitutional Court adjudicated the dispute. Here, the State is not intervening in the administration of the temple. When there is a dispute between Milani group and Ramesh Babu group in respect of a right to conduct the festival in the temple, the same cannot be determined by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as there are disputed questions of fact, which can be best adjudicated only by adducing evidence before the Civil Court. If Milani group wants to assert their right of celebration, and if that is going to create law and order problem, it is well within the powers of the Police to interpose under Section 149 Cr.P.C. and prevent outbreak of violence.
14. In the light of the above discussion, W.P.(MD)No.3880 of 2016 is dismissed. In the light of dismissal of W.P.(MD)No.3880 of 2016 filed by Milani group, W.P.(MD)No.3661 of 2016 becomes stale, and is therefore dismissed. Contempt Petition (MD)No.255 of 2016 is also dismissed.
To
1. The Superintendent of Police, Theni District, Theni.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Theni District, Theni.
3. The Inspector of Police, Veerapandi Police Station, Theni..