Madras High CourtWP(MD)/1498/2017partly allowed

K.Gopalasubramanian v. The Inspector Of Police

2017-01-31Honourable Mr Justice P. Kalaiyarasan,Honourable Mr Justice A. Selvam2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 31.01.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN W.P(MD)No.1498 of 2017 K.Gopalasubramanian .. Petitioner Vs.

The Inspector of Police, Puliyangudi Police Station, Puliyangudi, Tirunelveli District.

.. Respondent 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 entire records relating to the proceedings of impugned order in Na.Ka.No.01/PIPS/2017 dated 24.01.2017, passed by the respondent and quash the same and consequently to direct the respondent to grant appropriate permission and adequate police protection to conduct the "Innisai Katcheri" program on 10.02.2017 on the eve of the Festival in Arulmigu Sri Iyvaraja Thiru Kovil, situates in Malaiyadikurichi Village, Kadayanallur Taluk, Tirunelveli District. For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Jeyakarthik For Respondent : Mr.D.Muruganantham, 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 order dated 24.01.2017 passed by the respondent and quash the same, by way of issuing a writ of certiorarified mandamus. 2.It is averred in the petition that the petitioner is a resident of Puliyangudi Village, Tirunelveli District. On 24.01.2017, the petitioner has given a representation to the respondent for getting necessary permission to conduct Innisai Katcheri in the place mentioned in the petition. But the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

respondent has rejected the same by way of saying that in the village mentioned in the petition so many communities are living, by way of passing the impugned order and in order to quash the same, the present writ petition has been filed. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has advanced his argument on the basis of averments made in the writ petition.

4.Mr.D.Muruganandam, learned Additional Government Pleader, has taken notice for the respondent.

5.Considering the fact that on 24.01.2017 a representation has been given by the petitioner and also considering that the same has been rejected by the respondent by way of saying a flimsy reason, this Court is inclined to quash the impugned order dated 24.01.2017.

6.In fine, this writ petition is allowed without costs and the impugned order dated 24.01.2017 passed by the respondent is quashed and the respondent is strictly directed to consider the representation and pass suitable order.

Sd/ Assistant Registrar(T & P) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Inspector of Police, Puliyangudi Police Station, Puliyangudi, Tirunelveli District.

+1cc to M/s.M.S.Jeyakarthik, Advocate, in SR No.5052. +1cc to Special Government Pleader in SR.No.5306. ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.1498 of 2017 31.01.2017 smn msm-jm/sar3/02.02.17/p2/4c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/