Consider plea of Kamachi Amman temple: Madras HC

The judge said the RDO shall pass appropriate orders by taking note of the earlier orders passed by the court in respect of previous years.

By :  J Stalin
Update: 2018-03-28 00:48 GMT
Madras high court

Chennai: Observing that administrative inconvenience or anticipated incidents may not be cited as the reason to stop instantly centuries-old religious customs and practice, unless such events themselves become unlawful by this time, the Madras high court has directed the revenue divisional officer, Cuddalore,  to pass appropriate orders on a plea from Sri Kamachi Amman Devasthanam, to permit the temple to take out the temple car at night on the day of the Panguni Uthiram festival on March 31.

Disposing of a petition from C. Vaidyanathan Achari, executive trustee of the Sri Kamachi Amman Devasthanam, assailing an order of the Madunagar police refusing permission to take out the temple car, Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu gave the directive.

The judge said the RDO shall pass appropriate orders by taking note of the earlier orders passed by the court in respect of previous years. The police authorities shall also extend sufficient protection during the conduct of such festival, the judge added.

The judge said there was no dispute to the fact that the petitioner was a denominational temple. It was also not in dispute that the temple was conducting car festival every year in the month of “Panguni” during night hours when the star ‘Utharam’ and Lagnam ‘Magharam’ fall at a particular point of time. It was also not in dispute that for the past 3 years, the petitioner had approached this court by filing petitions seeking such permission. It was seen that this court has disposed of those petitions, resulting out of which, s when the star ‘Utharam’ and Lagnam ‘Magharam’ fall at a particular point of time. It was also not in dispute that for the past 3 years, the petitioner had approached this court by filing petitions seeking such permission.It was also not in dispute that for the past 3 years, the petitioner had approached this court by filing petitions seeking such permission.

Similar News