Judgment :- V. Dhanapalan, J. 1. Admit. The learned Additional Advocate General has already taken notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 2. This writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to give permission to conduct “Manjuvirattu” event along with Sri Muniandaver Temple festival on 16.04.2008 at Rappusal Village, Illupur Taluk, Pudukottai District. 3. The petitioners case is that he is an Ex-Village President and he has filed this writ petition on behalf of the general public of his village who number more than 3,000; every year, the villagers conduct “Manjuvirattu” in connection with the temple festival in the month of April; the “Manjuvirattu” events are traditional and are conducted by the villagers from time immemorial; the neighbouring villagers too used to participate in the sport events conducted during the festival and exhibit their skills besides entertaining the audience and this system has been in vogue without any hindrance; he was under the bona fide impression that this year also the function would start without any hassle in the same manner as it was done in the preceding years and approached the first and second respondents to accord permission and also protection for conducting the “Manjuvirattu” sport event for this year also; as there was no response from the respondents, he made a representation on 04.04.2008 which was received by the respondents on 05.04.2008; he has been given to understand that there is an order of the Honble Supreme Court prohibiting the conduct of “Manjuvirattu” cultural event and therefore, his request was not considered; however, it is further construed that the order of the Supreme Court has not in any way prevented him from conducting the “Manjuvirattu” cultural event, but, it can be conducted with some conditions imposed as per the Supreme Court order. 4. 4. The petitioner has specifically averred in his affidavit that Sri Muniandaver Temple festival for this year is to take place on 16.04.2008; the event of “Manjuvirattu” is a part of the temple festival and it is traditionally and customarily followed from their ancestors period and therefore, the event has to be permitted to go on as per the schedule and the respondents have an obligation to look into his request as his application for permission as well as his representation are pending without consideration and hence, this writ petition. 5. Heard Mr. M. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T. Raja, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents. 6. Mr. M. Suresh Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the conduct of “Manjuvirattu” is a tradition and custom from time immemorial and right from their ancestors period, the celebration of the festival along with the cultural event of “Manjuvirattu” as a part of the festival, has been conducted without any hindrance so far; the conduct of “Manjuvirattu” event has been considered by this Court as well as the Honble Supreme Court in a number of matters and finally, some stringent conditions have been imposed with permission to conduct the “Manjuvirattu”; therefore, the petitioner has come forward that the same conditions may also be imposed for this “Manjuvirattu” sport event, thereby, permitting him to conduct the “Manjuvirattu” cultural event as a part of the festival. 7. During the course of his arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to an order dated 09.04.2007 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(MD) No.3214 of 2007 to substantiate his contention that in an earlier occasion, similar request has been considered by this Court for the months of March and April. In this context, it his strenuous argument that this matter has not been taken on appeal and as such, it has become final. He has also pointed out an order dated 16.04.2007 of a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.3510 of 2007 to contend that in respect of a festival sport event i.e. Rekla Race, this Court has granted permission, but, with stringent guidelines and therefore, the respondents are bound to accord permission to the petitioner. 8. He has also pointed out an order dated 16.04.2007 of a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.3510 of 2007 to contend that in respect of a festival sport event i.e. Rekla Race, this Court has granted permission, but, with stringent guidelines and therefore, the respondents are bound to accord permission to the petitioner. 8. Per contra, the learned Additional Advocate General has contended that the grant of permission to conduct “Manjuvirattu” or “Jallikattu” or any other sport events, which is harmful and dangerous to the human lives is the main concern of the State with a view to protect the animal welfare as per the existing Regulations of the Animal Welfare Board. He has also contended that, after a Division Bench order dated 09.03.2007 passed by this Court, the matter has been taken up to the Supreme Court and a S.L.P. is pending in S.L.P.No.11686 of 2007. The learned Additional Advocate General has brought to the notice of this Court by producing the order of the Supreme Court in Application No. 15 of 2008 to indicate that initially, there was an order of stay granted by the Supreme Court and thereafter, the said order of stay has been modified, but, however, stringent conditions had been imposed and the guidelines imposed for the conduct of the “Jallikattu” event have been annexed to the order of the Supreme Court and those conditions are to be strictly imposed if at all permission is to be accorded. 9. We have given our heedful thought to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and we have also perused the material documents and the relevant earlier orders of this Court as well as the Supreme Court. 10. It is seen that the petitioner, representing on behalf of the villagers, has made an application seeking permission to conduct “Manjuvirattu” in the village, claiming the same as a cultural event. Pending the application, a representation had been sent to the respondents on 04.04.2008 and the same was received by them on 05.04.2008. It is also seen that the “Manjuvirattu” event is a part of the temple festival to be scheduled on 16.04.2008. Pending the application, a representation had been sent to the respondents on 04.04.2008 and the same was received by them on 05.04.2008. It is also seen that the “Manjuvirattu” event is a part of the temple festival to be scheduled on 16.04.2008. The petitioner claims that the conduct the festival is a traditional and customary right even from the period of their ancestors and the same has been followed without any hindrance and therefore, the permission to conduct the “Manjuvirattu” cultural event during the temple festival time has to be considered positively. 11. When this Court posed a question to the learned Additional Advocate General as to whether the guidelines referred to in the condition no.2 of the Supreme Courts order are the same as the one annexed to the order of the Supreme Court, the learned Additional Advocate General replied in affirmative and submitted that therefore, it can be taken note of and the same guidelines may be imposed to the petitioner to conduct the “Manjuvirattu”. He has further submitted that the Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 09.03.2007 passed in W.A.Nos.119 of 2006 etc., batch has been taken on appeal and subsequent to that, a Division Bench of this Court, by its judgment in W.P. (MD) No.3214 of 2007, has granted permission to conduct the “Manjuvirattu” and the same has ended in finality inasmuch as the said matter has not been taken on appeal. 12. It is not in dispute that a Division Bench of this Court, vide its order dated 09.04.2007, in W.P. (MD)No.3214 of 2007, has granted permission to conduct “Manjuvirattu” during the months of March and April but subject to strict adherence to certain guidelines and admittedly, this order has not been taken on appeal and as such, has become final. Our anxious attention has been drawn to yet another Division Bench order dated 16.04.2007 in W.P.(MD)No.3510 of 2007 in which when a similar request was put forward, this Court has remanded the matter to the competent authority to take a decision at an early date to consider the claim of the petitioner for conduct of the sport event. 13. Our anxious attention has been drawn to yet another Division Bench order dated 16.04.2007 in W.P.(MD)No.3510 of 2007 in which when a similar request was put forward, this Court has remanded the matter to the competent authority to take a decision at an early date to consider the claim of the petitioner for conduct of the sport event. 13. Above all, the counsel on either side have brought to the notice of this Court that the order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 09.03.2007 passed in W.A.No.119 of 2006 has been taken on appeal in S.L.P. No.11686 of 2007 along with an application in I.A.No.15 of 2008. A perusal of the order of the Supreme Court in the said application reveals that on 27.07.2007, the Supreme Court has issued an order of stay of the operation of the impugned order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 09.03.2007 in W.A.No.119 of 2006. Further, on 11.01.2008, the Supreme Court has declined to vacate the stay which was granted earlier. However, it is seen that in the application filed by the State of Tamil Nadu for modification of the order passed by the Supreme Court on 11.01.2008, it has been held as under: “We do not approve of all the reasons given by the State of Tamil Nadu for modifying the order. However, it is pointed out by the learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu that this is a part of the religious festival of Pongal and the villages have been celebrating the same from time immemorial. It has been submitted that extreme care and precautions will be taken by the District Authorities and no harm or injuries will be caused to the citizens, spectators, participants or the animals.” 14. Holding so, the Supreme Court has modified its earlier order subject to the following conditions: “i In Para 29 of the impugned Judgment, the Division Bench of the High Court, has directed certain precautions to be taken. Such precautions shall be completely followed by the State Authorities. ii The State has submitted the “guidelines for conduct of Jallikattu” as Annexure 3 to the present application. Such precautions shall be completely followed by the State Authorities. ii The State has submitted the “guidelines for conduct of Jallikattu” as Annexure 3 to the present application. The State shall ensure that the said guidelines, a copy of which is annexed, are fully followed: iii Any organization or group intending to conduct Jallikattu shall inform in writing the Collector of the respective district of Deputy Collector of the Sub-district at least three days prior to the event and secure his permission. iv The district administration shall take all precautions to ensure that the animals are not tortured or subjected to cruel treatment. They shall also take necessary steps for the safety of the spectators and participants. v The Collector or Deputy Collector, as the case may be, shall, on grant of permission for any Jallikattu inform the branch of the Animal Welfare Board in the District Collector shall also extend cooperation to the Doordarshan or Animal Welfare Board to Videograph the event. Representatives at the Animal Welfare Board shall be given sufficient protection and also give vintage position to videograph the event. vi After the event is held the concerned Collector should give a Report within a period of two weeks to this Court. They shall follow the above guidelines strictly.” With the above order, the list containing the guidelines suggested for the conduct of "Jallikattu" sport event was also annexed. 15. The learned Additional Advocate General has also reported to this Court that the order of the Supreme Court has been given effect to and scrupulously followed by the District Administration and the festival was conducted. 16. We have to cautiously look into the case of the petitioner as grant of any positive unconditional order in this matter may lead to similar claims in future. It is also to be noted that the order of the Supreme Court as well as this Court will have application to this case i.e. the conduct of “Manjuvirattu” which is a cultural festival. It appears that the conduct of “Jallikattu” as otherwise known as the “Manjuvirattu” has been considered on earlier occasions and in one case, a Division Bench of this Court, in its order dated 09.04.2007, has granted permission to conduct “Manjuvirattu” cultural event during the months of March and April. It appears that the conduct of “Jallikattu” as otherwise known as the “Manjuvirattu” has been considered on earlier occasions and in one case, a Division Bench of this Court, in its order dated 09.04.2007, has granted permission to conduct “Manjuvirattu” cultural event during the months of March and April. Therefore, our attention is focused to Annexure 3 of the application before the Supreme Court in which the State has submitted certain guidelines to be followed at the time of conduct of event and the same have been imposed by the Supreme Court in the form of Annexure 3 to its order. 17. At the risk of repetition, it needs to be stated that the learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that any order passed by this Court is subject to the outcome of the Special Leave Petition which is pending before the Supreme Court. At the same time, it should also be stated that this petition has been filed to maintain the culture of the villagers as otherwise they would be prejudiced and in this context, the petitioner has also fairly agreed to adhere to the conditions imposed by the Supreme Court and also the guidelines which form part of its order. 18. Taking note of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and particularly, the Division Bench order dated 09.04.2007 passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.3214 of 2007 in which permission has been granted to conduct "Manjuvirattu" cultural event for the months of March and April which has become final as stated earlier, we are of the considered opinion that the relief sought in this petition can safely be considered for this year alone since the subject matter of this petition is still pending before the Supreme Court in S.L.P. No.11686/2007. While holding so, we are conscious in our view that this order can only be subject to the order of the Supreme Court in the Special Leave Petition referred to above in respect of events in future years/festivals. 19. While holding so, we are conscious in our view that this order can only be subject to the order of the Supreme Court in the Special Leave Petition referred to above in respect of events in future years/festivals. 19. Thus, upon perusing the entire materials and the peculiar circumstances involved in the case and also considering Jallikattu as a cultural event and a part of religious festival, which have been taken note of by the Supreme Court as well as this Court on earlier occasions, we are of the view that a mandamus can be granted and accordingly, we are inclined to direct the respondents to accord permission to the petitioner subject to the following conditions being fulfilled by the petitioner to conduct the “Manjuvirattu” as part of the festival to be conducted on 16.04.2008 in accordance with the order dated 15.01.2008 containing the conditions imposed in I.A. No.15/2008 in Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.11686/2007 by the Supreme Court and the guidelines annexed therein, which go thus: “GUIDELINES SUGGESTED FOR THE CONDUCT OF JALLIKATTU FESTIVAL 1. Double-barricading of the arena or the way through which the bulls pass through in order to avoid injuries to the spectators and by-standers who can be permitted to remain within the barricades; 2. Fixing up of gallery for the spectators to sit and watch the proceedings. The Gallery should be made with strong sticks to permit occupation; 3. The number of occupants in the Gallery should not exceed the limit prescribed by Public Works Department to avoid collapsing of the gallery. A safety certificate should be obtained from the local Public Works Department authorities; 4. The persons who wish to being their bulls should obtain prior permission and the organizers shall see that the bulls are put to proper testing by Animal Husbandry authorities to ensure that the performance enhancement drugs are not administered to the bulls in any form. The authorities should also ensure issuance of certificate about the relative strength of the bulls from the Animal Husbandry Department Officials. The Joint Director of Animal Husbandry shall requisition the services of the experts from the nearby dispensaries also. The animals selected should also be put to Nicotine Test, Cocaine Test before a certificate of suitability of the bulls to participate in the event is issued by the authorities; 5. The Joint Director of Animal Husbandry shall requisition the services of the experts from the nearby dispensaries also. The animals selected should also be put to Nicotine Test, Cocaine Test before a certificate of suitability of the bulls to participate in the event is issued by the authorities; 5. The participants in the event should also enroll their names in Advance to the revenue authorities. They should also be put to thorough check up by the Physicians available in the medical team and only after their certification about the suitability of the individuals; they should be allowed to participate in the event. 6. Full fledged medical facility should be made available near the Area so that quick and immediate medical attention can be given to the injured participants. A mobile hospital and an ambulance with necessary life saving drugs must be kept ready to rush the injured to the Major hospitals, if warranted. The potency of the drugs must be ensured and got certified by Medical Officer of local Government Hospital. Taking expired tablets and drugs must be strictly avoided. Availability of Ambulances nearer the arena must be ensured. If sufficient ambulances are not available with the Government, Private ambulances must be secured and kept ready to meet emergent contingencies during the event. 7. Potable drinking water supply as well as sanitation facilities should be ensured by the local bodies (i.e. Village Panchayat and Block Panchayat) in the village where the event is scheduled. 8. An exclusive dress for the participants can also be thought of both for the sake of identification and to provide a charm to the heroic game. At Alanganallur, yellow color banyans were supplied free of cost to the participants which made identification of participants easy. 9. A Deputy Collector level Officer can be nominated to look after each item of event management like checking up of bulls, checking up of participants, checking up the barricading and gallery arrangements, medical facilities, water supply and sanitary arrangements, etc. 10. Police Department should work out a bandobust scheme and an Executive Magistrate is attached to the Special Police Team. 11. A preliminary meeting can be held with the the organizers and the participants at least one day before the date of event and rules are thoroughly explained to them. The rules can be framed in Tamil in a Pamphlet-format and distributed to create better awareness. 12. 11. A preliminary meeting can be held with the the organizers and the participants at least one day before the date of event and rules are thoroughly explained to them. The rules can be framed in Tamil in a Pamphlet-format and distributed to create better awareness. 12. Two co-ordination meetings of Officials can be held by the District Collector along with the Superintendent of Police first by preliminary arrangements and the second one 5 years before the event.” However, this order is subject to the outcome of the Special Leave Petition in S.L.P.No.11686 of 2007. Resultantly, this writ petition is allowed with above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P. is closed.