LiveLaw Madras High Court Weekly Roundup: July 13 to July 19, 2026

Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 313 To 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 326 NOMINAL INDEX Sivanupandian v The District Collector and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 313 P. Sundararaju v The District Collector and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 314 Easwari and Others v The Chief Secretary and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 315 Suji @ Kasi v The State, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 316 The Secretary To Government and Others v B Mohan, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 317 BR Aravindakshan v Union of India and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 318 B. Ramesh @ Kaviya Ramesh v The State of Tamil Nadu, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 319 Anbalagan P and Others v The District Collector and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 320 The Secretary to Government and Another v VA Anand, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 321 Dr Ponraj v State, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 322 M Gnanasoundari v The Secretary, Law Department and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 323 M v B, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 324 J Balasubramani v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 325 Krishnamoorthy v State and Another, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 326 REPORT No Right To Pollute Water Bodies In Name Of Religion: Madras High Court On Discarding Clothes In River During Death Rituals Case Title: Sivanupandian v The District Collector and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 313 The Madras High Court recently observed that no person had a right to pollute waterbodies in the guise of performing religious rituals for the departed. [2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 313] The bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice B Pugalendhi made the observation after noting the excess waste that was being dumped in the Tamirabarani river by devotees who came there to perform rituals for the departed. The court directed the authorities to ensure that the river does not get polluted through the rituals. However, noting that the issue involved the religious sentiments of Hindus, the court was not inclined to pass any orders without hearing the stakeholders. The court also added that though believers had the right to do something which was spiritually beneficial to them, such right should not violate the rights of others in society. The court highlighted that the freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution was subject to public health. 'No Hierarchy Among Devotees Based On Birth': Madras High Court Allows SC Community To Participate In Temple Rituals Case Title: P. Sundararaju v The District Collector and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 314 The Madras High Court recently permitted members of the Adi Dravidar community, a scheduled caste community, to perform the Ninth Day Mandakapadi (temple pooja) during the Chithirai festival in Arulmighu Sri Moongil Ayyanar Temple. [2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 314] Justice L Victoria Gowri held that the Constitution does not recognise any hierarchy among the devotees based on birth. The court added that though courts usually exercise restraint in matters concerning religious practices, such restraint could not be used to perpetuate practices which offend the constitutional guarantees such as equality, dignity and fraternity. Madras High Court Quashes Appointment Of 54 Coimbatore Corporation Junior Assistants, Terms Selection Process “Fraud” Case Title: Easwari and Others v The Chief Secretary and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 315 The Madras High Court has recently set aside the appointment of 54 Junior Assistants in the Coimbatore Corporation after noting that the entire selection process was flawed and tainted. [2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 315] The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice N Senthilkumar held that recruitment to public services should inspire public confidence. The court noted that there was no selection committee constituted but only a verification committee headed by an Assistant Commissioner to verify the documents of the candidates, which was unknown to the service rules. Thus, the court noted that there was no valid selection committee as per the Service Rules or any procedure to assess the candidates were followed to assess the suitability and eligibility of the candidates. The court emphasised that equal opportunity in public employment was a constitutional mandate. The court added that the tainted selection process was a ground to vitiate the entire selection process. The court also remarked that illegality in selection was not just a ground to vitiate the selection but also had larger repercussions in society. Madras High Court Cautions Young Women Against Sharing Intimate Photos Online, Issues Appeal In English, Hindi And Tamil Case Title: Suji @ Kasi v The State Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 316 While dismissing the appeal of a man against his conviction in a case of sexual assault by intimidation using intimate images, the Madras High Court appealed to young women not to share their intimate photos or videos online, no matter how deep the affection may appear....

LiveLaw Madras High Court Weekly Roundup: July 13 to July 19, 2026

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Upasana Sajeev

LiveLaw Madras High Court Weekly Roundup: July 13 to July 19, 2026

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers