Writ relief was unwarranted for a private highway race lacking clearances and posing law-and-order risks.

Murugesan challenged an order refusing permission to conduct a bullock-cart race on 4 October 2026, from Puliyangulam to Karungulam via the Tirunelveli–Tiruchendur Main Road, and sought a direction to grant permission subject to conditions

The petitioner’s counsel stated that the race was proposed for an individual’s birthday, not as part of a village temple festival

The respondents relied on the petitioner’s failure to obtain required departmental NOCs, the proposed use of a major State Highway, communal and temple-administration disputes, and multiple criminal cases and counter-cases involving the rival groups

The High Court dismissed the writ petition

1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to a writ setting aside the refusal of permission and directing the authorities to permit the proposed bullock-cart race

2. Whether, in light of the procedural deficiencies and asserted public-safety and law-and-order concerns, the Court should exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 to grant the requested relief

The Court referred to its extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, observing that it would not be appropriate to invoke that jurisdiction in the circumstances of this case

It also relied on the requirement that applicants follow prescribed procedures and obtain necessary no-objection certificates from relevant administrative and emergency authorities before seeking permission for such an event

The judgment cites no specific statutory provision or precedent.

The Court found that the petitioner had not followed the prescribed procedures or obtained the required NOCs

It also considered that the proposed race would use a busy State Highway and was sought for a private birthday celebration, while the village had existing communal friction, temple-administration disputes, and multiple criminal cases between rival groups

In view of the resulting safety and law-and-order concerns, the Court held that the case did not warrant relief under Article 226

The writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs