Madras High CourtWP(MD)/631/2018dismissed as infructuous

Kanagaraj, S/O.Nainar v. The District Collector

2018-01-23Honourable Mr Justice P. Rajamanickam3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.01.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM W.P.(MD) No.631 of 2018 and W.M.P(MD).No.664 of 2018 Kanagaraj

...Petitioner

-Vs1. The District Collector,

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruchendur Division,

3. The Superintendent of Police,

4. The Inspector of Police, Thatarmadam Police Station, 5.Sittar Raj ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner to perform the Sri Mutharamman Temple Festival on 17.01.2018 or any other suitable day by considering the petitioner's representation dated 19.12.2017.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Jegan For Respondents : Mr.N.Shanmugaselvan Additional Government Pleader (Crl.side) for R1 to R4 : Mr.K.Murugesan For R5

ORDER

The Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner to perform Sri Mutharamman Temple Festival on 17.01.2018, based on the representation submitted by the petitioner, dated 19.12.2017. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that festival was celebrated on 17.01.2018, but the fifth respondent violating the order passed by this Court has conducted light music, viz., Villu Pattu.

3.The learned Additional Government Pleader has submitted that after considering the representation submitted by the petitioner as well as the fifth respondent, permission was granted to celebrate the festival. Accordingly, both parties have celebrated the festival on 17.01.2018. Hence, this petition has become infructuous.

4.The learned counsel for the fifth respondent has submitted that this Court has not passed any order with regard to conducting of the festival and hence, the allegation made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the fifth respondent has violated this Court's order is not true. He further submitted that the fifth respondent has celebrated the function as per the conditions and restrictions imposed by the respondents 1 to 4. 5.Considering the aforesaid submissions, since already the festival has been celebrated on 17.01.2018 itself, this petition is dismissed as infructuous.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Crl side) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The District Collector,

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruchendur Division,

3. The Superintendent of Police,

4. The Inspector of Police, Thatarmadam Police Station, + 1 cc TO Mr.K.Murugesan , Advocate in SR No. 44209 + 1 cc TO The Special Government Pleader in SR No. 44046 rmk AE/SKN RSK/SAR2/08.02.2018/3P/7C W.P.(MD) No.631 of 2018 and W.M.P(MD).No.664 of 2018 23.01.2018