Madras High CourtWP(MD)/7554/2019disposed of

K.Jeyapaul v. The Superintendent Of Police

2019-03-29Honourable Mr Justice N. Seshasayee2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 29.03.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE W.P.(MD)No.7554 of 2019 K.Jeyapaul ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

2.The Inspector of Police, Thondi Police Station, Thondi, Ramanathapuram District.

... Respondents PRAYER:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner and his aquaculture form in S.No.186/1J, 186/1K and 186/1L, Thomadarapattinam, Vattaram Group, Thiruvadanai, Ramanathapuram District within the time that may be stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff for M/s.Ajmal Associates For Respondents : Mrs.S.Bharathi Government Advocate *****

ORDER

The present petition has been filed to direct the respondents to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner and his aquaculture firm.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondents.

3. The petitioner is in the process of doing aquaculture farm and has made some infrastructure, but in order he could obtain necessary approval from the concerned authorities. Now he faces threat from local villagers over the safety of the infrastructure that he has now constructed. He submits that few locals demanded money and caused certain damages to the infrastructure that he has put up. A complaint made by the petitioner has also not evoked necessary response from the respondent police. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5. The learned Government Advocate submitted that the petitioner's partner had preferred a complaint reporting about the incident and a preliminary enquiry was conducted by the police and those individuals have agreed not to disturb the petitioner's possession, though they raise some dispute over the land.

6. The threat perception to the petitioner to the ongoing development of his aquaculture farm appears to be real, and if the said perception continues, the petitioner is at liberty to file his representation or complaint to the second respondent police, who shall cause such necessary enquiry and take appropriate action on the same as may be necessary to protect the aquaculture farm of the petitioner.

7. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) ta To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

2.The Inspector of Police, Thondi Police Station, Thondi, Ramanathapuram District.

1 CC to M/s.AJMAL ASSOCIATES, Advocate ( SR-58449[F] dated 02/04/2019 ) +1 CC to M/s.AJMAL ASSOCIATES, Advocate ( SR-58256[F] dated 02/04/2019 ) Order made in W.P.(MD)No.7554 of 2019 29.03.2019 DS/ /SAR- (27.04.2019) 2P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/