{"id":365705,"date":"2025-11-04T11:30:29","date_gmt":"2025-11-04T06:00:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=365705"},"modified":"2025-11-10T09:54:36","modified_gmt":"2025-11-10T04:24:36","slug":"mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/","title":{"rendered":"Public ground belongs to all: Madras High Court allows conduct of Hindu event; upholds Fundamental Right under Article 25"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Madras High Court:<\/span> In a petition filed by a resident of N. Panchampatti Village, seeking permission to conduct Annadhanam (distribution of food) in a nearby public ground in connection with the Kumbabisekam of a local Hindu temple, a Single Judge Bench of G.R. Swaminathan<\/span>, J., while allowing the petition, held that a public ground should be available for use by all communities or none. The Court rejected the submission that Christians could use the ground on Easter, but Hindus could not conduct Annadhanam there. It was held that exclusion based solely on religion offends Article 15<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Background:<\/h3>\n

The case arose from the petitioner’s attempt to conduct Annadhanam (distribution of food) in connection with the Kumbabisekam of a Hindu temple in N. Panchampatti Village, Dindigul District, scheduled for 03-11-2025. To facilitate the event, the petitioner sought permission from the Tahsildar to use an open ground located near the temple. However, the Tahsildar rejected the request and instead allotted an alternative site, which was a public road from N. Panchampatti to Munnilaikottai. Aggrieved by the decision, the petitioner filed the present petition.<\/p>\n

The Inspector of Police, Chinnalapatti Police Station, who was present in person, submitted that if the event was allowed to be conducted in the petition-mentioned ground, it would give rise to law-and-order issues.<\/p>\n

The Respondent 4, representing the Christian community, submitted that on a portion of the ground in question, a stage was constructed 100 years ago and that it was known as pascha stage. Every year, during Easter festival, programs and dramas were held on the said stage, and people assembled in the ground opposite to the stage to watch the same.<\/p>\n

According to him, Hindus were never allowed to use the ground in question for any religious purpose. He drew attention to the proceedings of the Tahsildar drawn in August 1912. The Respondent 4 also filed a detailed counter-affidavit and pointed out that in the year 2017, a peace committee meeting was convened and that it was resolved therein not to conduct any function except the ones that were permitted over the last 100 years. His specific stand was that there should not be any departure or deviation from the said stand.<\/p>\n

In the counter-affidavit filed by the Respondent 4 himself, it was admitted that the open space in front of the pascha stage belonged to the panchayat. It was further submitted that the land in N. Panchampatti Village was classified as “vacant site \/ grama natham” and that it belonged to the government.<\/p>\n

Analysis and Decision:<\/h3>\n

The Court emphasised that when the land in question was not a patta land but belonged to the Government, it should be available to all sections irrespective of religious or communal background. The Court observed that “we are a secular, democratic republic. Our Constitution came into force on 26-01-1950. Any pre-constitutional arrangement that is not in accord with the constitutional provisions and ethos cannot be allowed to continue. A public ground should be available for the use of all communities or none.”<\/span><\/p>\n

The Court rejected the submission that while Christians could use the ground on Easter, Hindus could not conduct Annadhanam in the very same place and held that if a public ground belonging to the State is available for use of the general public, a particular section cannot be excluded from using the same. If the sole ground of exclusion is religion, it certainly offends Article 15<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Court emphasised that the right to hold Annadhanam can even be brought within the scope of one’s fundamental right under Article 25<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>. When it comes to upholding fundamental rights, it is the duty of the local administration to stand in aid of the same. If any law-and-order problem arises, the same must be dealt with appropriately. The police should not choose the easy option of stifling the fundamental rights.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Court noted that in the village in question, there were 2500 Christian families. On the other hand, there were only 400 Hindu families. The Hindus were grossly outnumbered by the Christians. That was why, it appeared that the Inspector of Police stated that since Christians were opposing the holding of the event in the petition-mentioned ground, there would be law and order problems. Observing that it was a very sorry state of affairs, the Court noted that in every religious event, there must be participation from the other religionists also. Unless such cultural and civilisational unity is demonstrated in practice, there will not be peace in society.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Court noted that the Tahsildar permitted the petitioner to conduct Annadhanam, and that the site alone was the bone of contention. Serving food by seating the public on the road would not be in order. The Court further emphasised that the ground in question belonged to the State, and by holding the event in the said place, the rights of third parties would not at all be affected. Hence, the order was interfered with accordingly.<\/p>\n

The Court while allowing the petition held that the petitioner is permitted by the Tahsildar to hold the Annadhanam event in the ground in question wherein he can also make appropriate arrangements. However, the ground should be handed over back in the very same condition in which it was entrusted. The Court further directed the Superintendent of Police, Dindigul to ensure that the event passes off peacefully.<\/p>\n

[K. Rajamani v. Joint Commissioner, 2025 SCC OnLine Mad 9385<\/a>, decided on 31-10-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

For the Petitioners:<\/span> P. Manikandan<\/p>\n

For the Respondents:<\/span> P. Subbaraj, Special Government Pleader, M. Lingadurai, Special Government Pleader, A. Albert James, Government Advocate, A. John Vincent<\/p>\n

Buy Constitution of India  HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"Constitution<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“When it comes to upholding fundamental rights, it is the duty of the local administration to stand in aid of the same. The police should not choose the easy option of stifling the fundamental rights.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":365711,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[91945,24004,10321,91947,91943,54949,91946,91944,46262,2567,91942,91941,91948],"class_list":["post-365705","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-annadhanam-ritual","tag-article-15","tag-article-25","tag-communal-dispute","tag-community-monopoly","tag-constitutional-provisions","tag-equal-access","tag-fundamental-right-violation","tag-justice-g-r-swaminathan","tag-Madras_High_Court","tag-public-ground-exclusivity","tag-public-ground-usage","tag-right-to-access"],"yoast_head":"\nMad HC: Public ground cannot be reserved for one community alone| SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Madras High Court held that public grounds cannot be reserved for one community alone and upheld right of Hindus to conduct Annadhanam as a fundamental right under Article 25 of Constitution.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Public ground belongs to all: Madras High Court allows conduct of Hindu event; upholds Fundamental Right under Article 25\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Madras High Court held that public grounds cannot be reserved for one community alone and upheld right of Hindus to conduct Annadhanam as a fundamental right under Article 25 of Constitution.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-11-04T06:00:29+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-11-10T04:24:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"800\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"533\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Public ground belongs to all: Madras High Court allows conduct of Hindu event; upholds Fundamental Right under Article 25\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/\",\"name\":\"Mad HC: Public ground cannot be reserved for one community alone| SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-11-04T06:00:29+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-11-10T04:24:36+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Madras High Court held that public grounds cannot be reserved for one community alone and upheld right of Hindus to conduct Annadhanam as a fundamental right under Article 25 of Constitution.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community.webp\",\"width\":800,\"height\":533,\"caption\":\"Public ground cannot be reserved for one community\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Public ground belongs to all: Madras High Court allows conduct of Hindu event; upholds Fundamental Right under Article 25\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mad HC: Public ground cannot be reserved for one community alone| SCC Times","description":"Madras High Court held that public grounds cannot be reserved for one community alone and upheld right of Hindus to conduct Annadhanam as a fundamental right under Article 25 of Constitution.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Public ground belongs to all: Madras High Court allows conduct of Hindu event; upholds Fundamental Right under Article 25","og_description":"Madras High Court held that public grounds cannot be reserved for one community alone and upheld right of Hindus to conduct Annadhanam as a fundamental right under Article 25 of Constitution.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-11-04T06:00:29+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-11-10T04:24:36+00:00","og_image":[{"width":800,"height":533,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Public ground belongs to all: Madras High Court allows conduct of Hindu event; upholds Fundamental Right under Article 25","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/","name":"Mad HC: Public ground cannot be reserved for one community alone| SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community.webp","datePublished":"2025-11-04T06:00:29+00:00","dateModified":"2025-11-10T04:24:36+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Madras High Court held that public grounds cannot be reserved for one community alone and upheld right of Hindus to conduct Annadhanam as a fundamental right under Article 25 of Constitution.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community.webp","width":800,"height":533,"caption":"Public ground cannot be reserved for one community"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/04\/mad-hc-public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community-fundamental-right-article-25\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Public ground belongs to all: Madras High Court allows conduct of Hindu event; upholds Fundamental Right under Article 25"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-one-community.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":351224,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/21\/mad-hc-set-aside-vehicle-pass-need-for-muruga-conference\/","url_meta":{"origin":365705,"position":0},"title":"Madras High Court sets aside condition requiring vehicle pass for devotees attending Lord Muruga\u2019s religious conference","author":"Editor","date":"June 21, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cWe are a republican democracy. Just as ease of doing business is important, the ease of participation in democratic gatherings is equally vital. The authorities ought not to come in the way of the citizens exercising their democratic right.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madras High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":370330,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/12\/19\/madras-hc-contempt-law-order-no-ground-disobedience\/","url_meta":{"origin":365705,"position":1},"title":"Madras High Court: Law and order no ground for disobedience of judicial orders; Officials held accountable for ignoring directions in Thiruparankundram hill lamp case","author":"Soumya Yadav","date":"December 19, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cLaw and order cannot be a ground for flouting a court\u2019s order, as that would be inexcusable, amount to a breakdown of law and order, and ultimately lead to paralysis of the constitutional machinery.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Law and order no ground for disobedience","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Law-and-order-no-ground-for-disobedience.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Law-and-order-no-ground-for-disobedience.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Law-and-order-no-ground-for-disobedience.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Law-and-order-no-ground-for-disobedience.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":323266,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/05\/31\/madras-high-court-appoints-wife-as-guardian-of-husband-coma-allows-sell-property-treatment\/","url_meta":{"origin":365705,"position":2},"title":"Madras High Court appoints wife as guardian for person as well as properties of husband in coma; Allows her to sell property for his treatment","author":"Apoorva","date":"May 31, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court was satisfied that the family is without any means and that unless the property is allowed to be dealt with, great hardship will be caused to them.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madras High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":214422,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/05\/08\/madras-hc-writ-petition-filed-against-rejection-of-nomination-for-contesting-election-dismissed-in-light-of-blanket-bar-of-art-329\/","url_meta":{"origin":365705,"position":3},"title":"Madras HC | Writ petition filed against rejection of nomination for contesting election dismissed in light of ‘blanket bar’ of Art. 329","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 8, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court:\u00a0A Bench of G.R. Swaminathan and T. Krishnavalli, JJ. refused to entertain a writ petition that challenged the decision of the Returning Officer whereby the petitioner's nomination filed for contesting by-election was rejected. The petitioner was a practicing lawyer wanting to contest the by-election for Ottapidaram reserved constituency\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":138431,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/06\/23\/appointment-of-addl-judges-madras-high-court-2\/","url_meta":{"origin":365705,"position":4},"title":"Appointment of Addl. Judges, Madras High Court","author":"Saba","date":"June 23, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"The President in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of Article 224 of the Constitution of India \u00a0appointed \u00a0Smt. V. Bhavani Subbaroyan, \u00a0Shri A.D. Jagadish Chandira, Shri G.R. Swaminathan, \u00a0Shri Abdul Quddhose, \u00a0Shri M. Dhandapani, and \u00a0Shri Pondicherry Daivasigamani Audikesavalu, to be Additional Judges of the Madras High\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Appointments & Transfers"","block_context":{"text":"Appointments & Transfers","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/appointments\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":344064,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/21\/madras-hc-denies-divorce-wife-private-acts-do-not-constitute-cruelty\/","url_meta":{"origin":365705,"position":5},"title":"\u2018Wife watching porn privately, engaging in self-pleasure do not constitute cruelty to husband\u2019; Madras HC denies divorce to husband","author":"Apoorva","date":"March 21, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cSelf-pleasure is not a forbidden fruit, its indulgence shall not lead to a precipitous fall from the Eden Garden of marriage. After marriage, a woman becomes a spouse, but she continues to retain her individuality. Her fundamental identity as an individual, as a woman, is not subsumed by her spousal\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madras High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/365705","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=365705"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/365705\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/365711"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=365705"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=365705"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=365705"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}