JUDGMENT : SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J. Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the second respondent in...........dated 04.03.2024 and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to grant permission and accord adequate police protection for conducting Sri Valli Thirumanam Drama on 08.03.2024 and Village Cultural Program on 09.03.2024 in Sithaalai Village, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District pursuant to the petitioner's representation dated 29.02.2024. 1. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner had filed this petition seeking to quash order passed by the second respondent in...........dated 04.03.2024 and with a consequential direction to the second respondent to grant permission and accord adequate police protection for conducting Sri Valli Thirumanam Drama on 08.03.2024 and Village Cultural Program on 09.03.2024 in Sithaalai Village, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District, based on the petitioner's representation dated 29.02.2024. 2. It is the further contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that in the previous year also, he had moved Writ Petition in W.P. (MD) No. 3263 of 2023 for the same relief and this Court vide order dated 16.02.2023, granted permission and also extended Police protection on 20.02.2023 between 07.00 p.m. to 11.00 p.m. based on the Petitioner's representation given to the Respondents on 13.02.2023. 3. It is the further contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner was under impression that this year, there will not be any problem and he will be granted permission. Instead, the second Respondent rejected the petition seeking permission. Therefore, the Petitioner was forced to file this Writ Petition seeking direction, as was granted last year. 4. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner invited attention of this Court to the proceedings of the Inspector of Police, Thirumangalam Police Station, Madurai District, wherein it has been stated on production of the order from this Court, they will consider the claim of the Petitioner. 5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) on instructions of the Respondents objects the submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner stating that all these permission had to be granted by the Thakkar and the Thakkar should be appointed by the orders of this High Court. There are rival claims in this village. 5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) on instructions of the Respondents objects the submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner stating that all these permission had to be granted by the Thakkar and the Thakkar should be appointed by the orders of this High Court. There are rival claims in this village. Also it is the submission of the learned Government Advocate that the permission sought by the Petitioner relates to celebrating the festival of the Temple and it should be through the Thakkar and not by the individual concerned. 6. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner had sought permission only for conduct of drama and cultural events in his patta land which is roughly half a kilometer away from the Temple. Therefore, there will not be any dispute or problem with the Temple authorities. He is not seeking administrative control of the Temple. The matter is subjudice with the Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department. 7. On perusal of the order passed on earlier occasion in W.P. (MD) No. 3263 of 2023 dated 16.02.2023 regarding Temple festival and the contention of the learned Counsel Petitioner to conduct the drama, which is roughly half a kilometer away from the Temple in the patta land of the Petitioner, this Court directs the Respondents to consider the representation of the Petitioner favourably, in the light of the circular of the Director General of Police/Head of State Police Force, Tamil Nadu and in the light of the earlier order passed by this Court. The Petitioner, who is the organizer of the programmes, shall pay necessary charges for the Police Personnel deployed for security, as per G.O.Ms. No. 139, Home (PoI. VIII) Dept. dated 04.03.2019. 8. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.