Madras High CourtWP(MD)/12515/2016disposed of

T.Saravanan v. The State Rep. By

2016-07-20Honourable Dr. Justice S. Vimala2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 20.07.2016

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE S.VIMALA W.P(MD)No.12515 of 2016 T.Saravanan

...Petitioner

Vs.

The State rep. by 1.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Vadamadurai Police Station, Dindigul District.

...Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the order of the 2nd respondent in Namoona dated 10.07.2016 and quash the same and pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to grant permission to conduct the cultural events Stage drama, Aadal Padal events on 05.08.2016 and 06.08.2016 respectively during the Ursav function of "Sri Vilangu Karuppannasamy Temple, Sukkampatti, Roadupudur, Vedachandur Taluk, Dindigul District. For Petitioner :

Mr.R.S.Sivaram For Respondents :

Mr.D.Muruganandam, Addl. Govt. Pleader *****

O R D E R

The writ petition has been filed praying to quash the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 10.07.2016 and for a consequential direction to the 2nd respondent to provide police protection and permission to the cultural events viz., Stage Drama, and Aadal Padal programme on 05.08.2016 and 06.08.2016 respectively.

2. Mr.D.Muruganandam, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the programme is being conducted by the villagers regularly in order to promote harmony during the temple festival. He would further submit that the representation given to the second respondent was rejected vide the impugned order dated 10.07.2016.

5. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that considering the law and problem https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

prevalent in the area, the permission for conducting the programme was rejected.

6. However, the reasons alleged may not exist as of now and as the situation is liable to change, the petitioner is permitted to make a fresh representation.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation to the second respondent in person on 25.07.2016 and on receipt of such representation, the second respondent is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders on merits and as per law immediately, as the programme is scheduled to be held on 05.08.2016 and 06.08.2016.

8.With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Vadamadurai Police Station, Dindigul District.

+1cc to M/s.R.S.Sivaram, Advocate in SR.37814 +1cc to the Special Government Pleader, in SR.37932 W.P(MD)No.12515 of 2016 20.07.2016 gcg PBK/NGM-MP/SAR-II 22/07/2016 ::2P-5C::(IT) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/