Sudalaimuthu. S/O.Sivaraman, v. The Assistant Superintendent
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.01.2018
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM W.P(MD)No.999 of 2018 Sudalaimuthu ... Petitioner -vs1.The Assistant Superintendant of Police, Office of the Assistant Superintendant of Police, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Munneerpallam Police Station, Munneerpallam, Tirunelveli District.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the Impugned Order in Na.Ka.No.04/Se.Mu.Aa/Vu.Kaa.Ka/Serai/2018, dated 08.01.2018 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and consequentially direct the second respondent to permit the petitioner to conduct Innisai Katcheri Programme on 31.01.2018 in connection with the Tiruvizha Celebration of Arulmigu Sri Muppidathi Amman, Arulmigu Sri Santhanamari Ambal Parivara Kovil Kodai Vizha situated at Perumal Sannathi Street, Gopalsamuthiram North, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Malaiyendran For Respondents : Mr.N.Shanmugaselvam Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed to quash the order passed by the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.04/Se.Mu.Aa/ Vu.Kaa.Ka/ Serai/2018, dated 08.01.2018.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order has been passed by the first respondent only, but, in the writ petition, it has been wrongly mentioned as second respondent and the said mistake has occurred due to typical error. He further submitted that the petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
has sought permission for performing temple festival from 29.01.2018 to 31.01.2018 and during the said festival, the petitioner wants to conduct Innisai Katchery. He further submitted that the first respondent has granted permission for performing temple festival, but he rejected the petition in respect of the prayer for conducting Innisai Katchery without assigning any reason.
3.The learned Additional Government Pleader has submitted that though no reason has been stated in the impugned order, three cases were already registered including the offence under Section 302 I.P.C., and that was the reason for not granting the permission to conduct Innisai Katchery.
4.Considering the aforesaid submissions, the petitioner is directed to give fresh representation within two days and any such representation is given, the first respondent has to consider and pass appropriate orders by giving reason.
5.With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(T & P) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Assistant Superintendant of Police, Office of the Assistant Superintendant of Police, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Munneerpallam Police Station, Munneerpallam, Tirunelveli District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1CC TO M/S.V.MALAIYENDRAN, ADVOCATE, SR NO.42752 W.P.(MD)No.999 of 2018 18.01.2018 Sss MS/PM-PN/SAR.1/18.01.2018/2P.5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/