NAGARAJAN Vs. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TRICHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is stated to belong to Maruthampatty Village, Manapparai Taluk, Trichy District. He has married a lady one Selvi as his first wife, who also belongs to the same area. The admitted case of the petitioner is that subsequently, he has married another lady one Amaravathi, as his second wife, who also stated to belong to the same area. But after the second marriage, he has taken his second wife to Virudhunagar District and settled at Vathrayupruppu.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that the temples situated at Maruthampatty Village namely, Karuppar Temple and Malayandi Temple, there are Adi festivals, which are fixed and the villagers are allowed to participate in the said festival by collecting Thalaikattu Vari. The petitioner's case is that the second wife, whom he has married, does not belong to his community and therefore, some of the village people by way of Kattapanchayat have ex -communicated the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner is not in a position to come to his village for the purpose of worshiping in the said temples. In these circumstances, the present writ petition is filed for a direction against the first respondent, namely, the District Collector to take action against people, who are involved in the Kattapanchayat at Maruthampatti village and also to direct respondents 2 to 4 to give police protection to the petitioner to perform his offerings to the deity during Adi festival to be conducted in July 2008.

(3.) MR . K.M. Vijayakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, who has taken notice on behalf of the respondents on instructions would submit that the allegation of the petitioner as such are false. While it is true that the petitioner has married Mrs. Amaravathi, who has been taken to Vathirayiruppu, wherein the petitioner is living along with her, the allegations as if there has been some Kattapanchayat and the petitioner has been prevented from entering into Maruthampatti village either for the purpose of participating in the temple festival or otherwise is denied. To substantiate the same, he would submit that on the complaint the police have conducted an enquiry. In the enquiry statements were recorded from one Pala Venkatachalam @ Mani, who was the former Chairman of the panchayat. In the said statement he has clearly stated that nobody in the village has either prevented or intend to prevent the petitioner from coming to Maruthampatti village either for the purpose of worshiping in the temples or otherwise.