Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, S.Thenan and T.Thirupathi, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the District Collector of Sivagangai District to grant permission for conducting 'Karagam Eduppu Thiruvizha' along with 'Manjuvirattu' on 17.03.2025 at Arulmigu Malayala Sastha Ayyanar Temple festival in K.Pudhupatti, Dharmapatti Post, Singamalai Taluk, Sivagangai District. They also sought a consequential direction to the Superintendent of Police to provide sufficient police protection for the peaceful conduct of the festival. The petitioners had submitted a representation to the District Collector on 18.12.2024, but it was not considered, prompting the filing of the writ petition. The court observed that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a statutory authority, there is a duty cast upon it to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders, instead of keeping it pending indefinitely. Non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty, and the court is justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 to direct consideration within a stipulated time. Accordingly, the court directed the first respondent (District Collector) to consider the petitioners' representation dated 18.12.2024 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within three days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The court clarified that it had not expressed any views on the merits of the matter, and it was open to the respondents to consider the representation on its own merits. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Duty of Statutory Authority - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - When a representation is made to a statutory authority, it is duty-bound to consider it on its own merits and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time; failure to do so amounts to dereliction of duty, justifying the court's intervention under Article 226 to direct consideration. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the District Collector is obligated to consider the petitioners' representation seeking permission for a temple festival and police protection, and whether the court can direct such consideration under Article 226.
Final Decision
The court directed the first respondent (District Collector) to consider the petitioners' representation dated 18.12.2024 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within three days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Statutory authority must consider representation within reasonable time
- Non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty
- Article 226 power to direct consideration
