Muniyasamy.M v. The District Collector
W.P.(MD)No.124 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.01.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH AND THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.ANANTHI W.P.(MD)No.124 of 2021 (Through Video Conferencing) M.Muniyasamy : Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector, Madurai District Madurai.
2.The Superintendent of Police, O/o. Superintendent of Police, Madurai District.
: Respondents PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to constitute an Organizing Committee comprising the representatives of all communities at Avaniapuram, for the Jallikattu to be conducted on 14.01.2021 at Avaniyapuram. For Petitioner : Ms.A.Rajini For Respondents : Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss for R1 & R2 Special Government Pleader Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy for Thenkal Kanmoi Vivasayigal Sangam
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner by way of Public Interest Litigation seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to constitute an Organizing Committee comprising the representatives of all communities of Avaniyapuram for the proposed Jallikattu scheduled to be conducted on 14.01.2021. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no such committee has been constituted and if any, the copy of the proceedings in this regard has not been furnished.
3. The learned Special Government Pleader produced a copy of the proceedings of the District Collector in Na.Ka.No.C3/49740/2020 dated 06.01.2021, which indicates a number of persons, who have been nominated to be the members of the Organizing Committee. On a perusal of the said order, it appears that the petitioner along with others made objections, which were rejected.
4. Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy representing Thenkal Pasana Vivasayigal https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2
W.P.(MD)No.124 of 2021 Sangam, who have been granted permission, but ironically not added as a party respondent though impleaded in the earlier proceedings in the last year, submitted that permission has been accorded to it in accordance with law by the authorities. As long as the said order stands, the petitioner cannot have grievance.
5. The grievance of the petitioner has been substantially complied with by the constitution of Organizing Committee. The petitioner did participate in the peace committee meeting, who objected to the proposed committee, but gave his objections. Therefore, the petitioner is very well aware of the decision to constitute a committee. Law does not require the copy of the order to be given to the petitioner. Be that as it may, the intention is to conduct the function peacefully. It may not be appropriate to have representation from groups having varied interests. Though number of persons have been made as party to the committee, we deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to include the petitioner also as a member, particularly when he has given his objections. Thus, the petitioner is certainly an interested person and it is not as if he does not want the function to go on.
6. In such view of the matter, we are inclined to direct the respondents to include the petitioner also as member of the Organizing committee in pursuant to the order dated 06.01.2021.
7. The writ petition stands disposed of with the above observations and direction. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) RR Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To 1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.
2.The Superintendent of Police, O/o. Superintendent of Police, Madurai District. W.P.(MD)No.124 of 2021 07.01.2021 NS(CO) KB(08.01.2021) 2P 3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2