Madras High CourtWP(MD)/21857/2018disposed of

Purushothaman, v. The Commissioner Of Police

2018-10-25Honourable Mr Justice N. Anand Venkatesh2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.10.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.(MD)No.21857 of 2018 Purushothaman ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Commissioner of Police, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Palayamkottai Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

... Respondents PRAYER:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Certiorarifed Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings issued by the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.446/FC/AC/Palai (L&O)/TIN-C/2018 dated 30.09.2018 and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to permit the petitioner movement to conduct the public meeting on any other day.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Selva For Respondents : Mr.B.Bhagawathi, Government Advocate.

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed, challenging the order passed by the second respondent, rejecting to grant permission to the petitioner to conduct a public meeting.

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the District Organizer of May 17 Movement. The petitioner wanted to celebrate the Birthday of Thanthai Periyar and also to celebrate the May 17 Movement. The petitioner had given a representation to the respondent police, seeking for permission to conduct the public meeting. The same was rejected by the respondent police on the ground that there is a prohibition order passed under Section 41(2) of Chennai City Police (Extension to the Cities of Salem, Thiruchirapalli and Tirunelveli) Act, 1997. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

4.The learned Government Advocate, on instructions would submit that the petitioner may be directed to give a fresh representation by indicating the place, where the public meeting is going to be conducted and also the date on which, it is going to be conducted, to the third respondent and the third respondent will consider the same in accordance with law.

5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that every time, permission is rejected on frivolous grounds. The learned counsel also submits that permission is given to other organizations to conduct public meeting and it is only being denied to this organization.

6.In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be a direction to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the third respondent by indicating the place, date and time, when the public meeting is scheduled to be held. The third respondent shall consider the said representation and shall grant permission for the same by imposing any reasonable conditions. The petitioner is bound to comply with the conditions imposed by the third respondent police.

7.This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above directions. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AD I) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS I) Myr To 1.The Commissioner of Police, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Palayamkottai Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

1CC TO MR V. SELVA, ADVOCATE SR 92643 1CC TO THE SPL GOVT PLEADER SR 92250 DS SKN SAR 1 29 10 2018 2P 6C W.P.(MD)No.21857 of 2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 25.10.2018