Chellaiah C v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.06.2022 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM C.Chellaiah
...Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, 2.The Inspector of Police, Eriodu Police Station, Kuziliyamparai Taluk, 3.The Tashildar, Kuziliyamparai Taluk, 4.Magudeeshwaran 5.Pandiyan
...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to grant police protection for the celebration of the temple festival from 17.07.2022 to 19.07.2022 namely "Arulmigu Vinayagar, Arulmigu Murugan, Arulmighu Kaliyamman, Arulmigu Mariamman, Arulmighu Manthai Muniyandi Thirukovil situated in Nagaiyakottai Village, Kujiliyamparai Taluk, Dindigul District, by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 09.06.2022. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Gnanagurunathan For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (crl.side)
O R D E R
This writ petitioner filed this Writ Petition seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to grant police protection for the celebration of the temple festival from 17.07.2022 to 19.07.2022 namely "Arulmigu Vinayagar, Arulmigu Murugan, Arulmighu Kaliyamman, Arulmigu Mariamman, Arulmighu Manthai Muniyandi Thirukovil situated in Nagaiyakottai Village, Kujiliyamparai Taluk, Dindigul District, by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 09.06.2022. 1/3
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire village people agreed to co-operate to conduct the temple festival in a peaceful manner. But, the respondents 4 and 5 alone gave a trouble to conduct the temple festival. Subsequent to the same, in order to conduct a cultural programme, they sought permission of the police by giving a representation dated 09.06.2022. But the second respondent has not considered the said representation. Since no order was passed, the petitioner has come before this Court for the above said relief.
3.The learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the second respondent has received the representation of the petitioner and the same is pending for consideration.
4.I have considered the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for the respondent police.
5. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu, Chennai had issued a circular memorandum in Rc.007301/Genl.I (1)/2019 dated 09.04.2019 along with instructions to the Inspectors of Police throughout Tamil Nadu for consideration of applications seeking permission for conducting cultural programme. Therefore, in view of the detailed circular and guidelines issued by the Director General of Police, the second respondent police is hereby directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 09.06.2022 and pass suitable orders based on the above said circular.
6. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No cost.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-I) // True Copy // /06/2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) tta To 1.The Superintendent of Police, 2.The Inspector of Police, Eriodu Police Station, 2/3
Kuziliyamparai Taluk, 3.The Tashildar, Kuziliyamparai Taluk, 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1 CC to M/s.M. GNANAGURUNATHAN, Advocate ( SR-26276[F] dated 16/06/2022 ) 16.06.2022 NSN(CO) KB(23.06.2022) 3P 6C 3/3