R.Ayyarsamy (Temple v. The Superintendent Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.06.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.AUTHINATHAN W.P(MD)No.11877 of 2017 R.Ayyarsamy (Temple Administrator) .. Petitioner Vs.

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

2. The Sub Inspector of Police, Taluk Police Station, Dindigul District.

.. Respondents PRAYER:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the second respondent in C.No.157/Mike/Eips/DGL/2017, dated 16.06.2017 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents herein to grant permission and adequate police protection for conducting the Aadalum Padalum function at Periyaponnimandurai Village, Dindigul Taluk, Dindigul District on the eve of Sri Kaliamman Sri Bagavathyamman Temple festival on 13.07.2017. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sarvagan Prabhu.

For Respondents : Mr.K.Guru, Additional Government Pleader.

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM, J.] This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to call for records relating to the rejection order dated 16.06.2017 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and also for directing the respondents to give necessary permission for conducting Adalpadal programme in the place mentioned therein, by way of issuing a writ of certiorarified mandamus.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.Mr.K.Guru, learned Additional Government Pleader, has taken notice for the respondents.

3.It is seen from the records that the petitioner has given a representation for the purpose mentioned therein, but the second respondent has rejected the same by way of passing the impugned order dated 16.06.2017, wherein it has been simply stated that due to law and order problem, permission cannot be granted. The reason assigned by the second respondent cannot be accepted and therefore this Court is inclined to pass the following order. 4.In fine, this writ petition is allowed in part without costs and the impugned order dated 16.06.2017 passed by the second respondent is quashed. The second respondent is directed to look into the representation alleged to have been given by the petitioner afresh and pass suitable orders on merits within a period of two days.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar() /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To

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

2. The Sub Inspector of Police, Taluk Police Station, Dindigul District.

+1cc to M/S. S.SARVAGAN PRABHU, Advocate, SR.No.62339. +1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No.62724 ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.11877 of 2017 28.06.2017 smn SDS/SV:MMS/SAR 1/30.06.2017/2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/