File photo: Madras High Court, Chennai
Photo: Yoga Balaji
Source: Wikimedia Commons
Licence: CC BY 3.0
Judgment Intelligence
OtherDr. R. Karpagam v. Union of India & Ors.
W.P. No. 36912 of 2026
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Date of Decision
- 11 September 2026
- Bench
- Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan
- Relevant Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India — Article 226; G.O.Ms.No.598, Public (Law and Order-B) Department, dated 09.08.2018; Central Pollution Control Board revised guidelines for idol immersion, dated 12.05.2020
Final Outcome
Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to avail an appropriate remedy in accordance with law; no order as to costs (para 2).
Source Madras High Court (mhc.tn.gov.in), decided 11.09.2026
Key holdings
- The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn at the petitioner's request, with liberty to avail an appropriate remedy in accordance with law (paras 1-2).
- No costs were ordered, and the written order states no reasons or observations on the merits (para 2).
Judgment digest by NyayVidhan: a summary of the court's judgment, not its text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.
Brief Facts
Dr. R. Karpagam filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the Union, the State, the Central and Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Boards, the Director General of Police and other officials to take time-bound measures for strict and uniform enforcement, throughout Tamil Nadu, of G.O.Ms.No.598 of 09.08.2018, the Central Pollution Control Board's revised idol-immersion guidelines of 12.05.2020 and the National Green Tribunal's directions of 24.01.2024 in O.A. No.135 of 2023 (SZ), and to set up the committees and enforcement mechanisms they require before 14.09.2026.
Court's Findings
When the petition was taken up on 11.09.2026, the petitioner's side sought to withdraw it with liberty to avail an appropriate remedy in accordance with law (para 1). In view of that request, the Bench dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn with that liberty and made no order as to costs (para 2). The written order records only the withdrawal: it contains no finding on delay, on whether a cause of action had arisen, or on the enforcement of the idol-immersion guidelines (paras 1-2).
Legal Principle
When a petitioner seeks to withdraw a writ petition with liberty to avail an appropriate remedy, the Court may dismiss it as withdrawn with that liberty; this order records no view on the merits of the relief sought (paras 1-2).