Parishioners may participate in the church festival upon paying the prescribed parish tax.

The 14 petitioners, residents and longstanding parishioners of St. Michael Athithuthar Church, Mela Asaripallam, alleged that the private respondents were preventing them from paying parish/membership tax, participating in the Church festival, and were subjecting them to social boycott and excommunication due to disputes concerning the Church and its administration.

They sought a writ of mandamus directing the District Collector to ensure that the Church authorities collected the parish tax from them and prevented the alleged unlawful social boycott and excommunication.

The Bishop and Church respondents denied any excommunication or social boycott and stated that the petitioners could pay the festival tax and participate in the festival scheduled from 25 September to 4 October 2026.

They also referred to a pending civil suit concerning the administration of the Trust.

Whether the petitioners were being subjected to social boycott or excommunication by the Church authorities, warranting a direction under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Whether the respondents should be directed to accept the petitioners’ parish/festival tax and permit them to participate in the Church festival.

Whether the disputed issues concerning the administration and management of the Church Trust could be adjudicated in the present writ petition.

The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to consider the petitioners’ prayer for a writ of mandamus.

A mandamus may issue where a public or legally enforceable duty is shown to have been breached; however, the Court does not ordinarily adjudicate disputed questions concerning private management or administration in writ proceedings, particularly where such matters are already pending before a civil court.

No specific statutory provision or judicial precedent was relied upon in the order; the decision was based principally on the pleadings, the submissions of the parties, and the absence of opposition to the petitioners’ participation in the festival.

The Court noted that the petitioners’ allegations of social boycott and excommunication were disputed by the private respondents.

The respondents expressly stated that there was no prohibition against the petitioners paying the applicable tax or participating in the forthcoming Church festival.

The Court declined to examine the parties’ broader allegations concerning Trust administration, Church property, jewels, cash, and related disputes because those matters were not properly raised in the present proceedings and were already the subject of a civil suit.

Since the private respondents and the Government authorities raised no objection to the petitioners’ participation, the Court treated the petition as arising from an apprehension of adverse action rather than an established act of social boycott.

The Court permitted the petitioners to participate in the Church festival from 25 September 2026 to 4 October 2026 and to pay the tax collected by the festival organisers, permitting them to proceed accordingly.

The connected miscellaneous petition was closed.