Sundaravadivel.R v. The Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.04.2023 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN R.Sundaravadivel ... Petitioner Vs.

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

2.The Inspector of Police, Aravakurichi Police Station, Karur District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to grant permission and necessary protection to conduct the 'Adal Padal' programme on 09.05.2023 at 06.00 p.m. to 11.00 p.m. in connection with 'Thiru Vizha' of Arulmigu Sri Kannimar, Sri Karuppana Swamy Thirukovil at Vadugapatti Village, Aravakurichi Taluk, Karur District.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Diraviyapandiyan For Respondents : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/5

O R D E R

The writ petitioner filed this Writ Petition seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to grant permission and necessary protection to conduct the 'Adal Padal' programme on 09.05.2023 at 06.00 p.m. to 11.00 p.m. in connection with 'Thiru Vizha' of Arulmigu Sri Kannimar, Sri Karuppana Swamy Thirukovil at Vadugapatti Village, Aravakurichi Taluk, Karur District.

2. Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, learned Government Advocate (Crl. side), takes notice for the respondents. By consent, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner submitted that Thiru Vizha of Amaravathipudur Village, Sri Mariamman Temple, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivakangai District, is going to be held on 09.05.2023. Subsequent to the same, in order to conduct a cultural programme on 09.05.2023, they sought permission of the Police by giving a representation dated 08.04.2023. But, the second respondent has not considered the said representation. Since no order was passed, the writ petitioner has come before this Court for the above said relief. 2/5

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondents would submit that by citing law and order issue the above said representation made by the petitioner has been rejected by the respondent on 14.04.2023. They have cited the incident that took place in the Pudukottai District.

5. I have considered the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondents.

6. Since the representation given by the petitioner was rejected by the second respondent citing the untoward incident happened in the Pudukottai District, the petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh representation. If such representation is being made, the second respondent shall consider the same on its own merits by assessing the ground situation and pass orders in accordance with law. 3/5

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

20.04.2023 NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No TM To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Karur, Karur District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Aravakurichi Police Station, Karur District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

G.ILANGOVAN, J TM Order made in Dated 20.04.2023 5/5