S.Arulraj v. The District Collector, Tenkasi District.2.The Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi District.3.The Inspector

W.P.Crl. (MD)No.1772 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED : 01.04.2026CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRIW.P.Crl. (MD)No.1772 of 2026and W.M.P.Crl. (MD).No.432 of 2026S.Arulraj... PetitionerVs.

The District Collector, Tenkasi District.

The Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi District.

The Inspector of Police, Kadayam Police Station, Tenkasi District.

S.Abhisek @ Manikandan ... RespondentsPRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first and second respondents based on the petitioner's representation dated 17.02.2026 to consider and stop the prayer hall run by the fourth respondent within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.H.VelavadhasFor R1 : Mr.C.Satheesh Government Advocate (Civil Side)For R2 and R3 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.)1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl. (MD)No.1772 of 2026ORDERSeeking to direct the first and second respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 17.02.2026 and stop the prayer hall run by the fourth respondent, this writ petition is filed.2. Heard the learned counsel on either side and carefully perused the materials placed before this Court. Since no adverse order is proposed to be passed against the private respondent, notice to him is dispensed with.3. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon him to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.4. In the light of the above observations and also the submissions made, there shall be a direction to the third respondent to consider the petitioner's 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl. (MD)No.1772 of 2026representation dated 17.02.2026, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the fourth respondent, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is also made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the matter and that it is open to the respondents to consider the same on its own merits.