Madras High CourtWP(MD)/12779/2016disposed of

V.Ramar v. The Superintendent Of Police

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.12779 of 2016 V.Ramar ... Petitioner Vs.

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

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Pavoorchathiram Police Station, Tirunelveli 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 pertaining to the proceeding dated 17.07.2016 of the 2nd respondent and quash that portion alone wherein the 2nd respondent rejected the permission for "Innisai Kachery" program as illegal and direct the 2nd respondent to give adequate police protection and to grant permission for conducting "Innisai Kachery" program on 22.07.2016 at 10.00 p.m. onwards in Arulmigu Selvavinayagar Temple, Mahilvananathapuram, Alangulam Taluk, Tirunelveli District. For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Alagusundar 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 17.07.2016 and for a consequential direction to the 2nd respondent to provide police protection and permission to the Innisai Kachery programme, scheduled to be held on 22.07.2016.

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 17.07.2016.

5. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that considering the law and problem prevalent in the area and the congestion of that area, the permission for conducting the programme was rejected.

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

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 21.07.2016 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 function is stated to be scheduled on 22.07.2016. 8.With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/ Assistant Registrar(AE) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Pavoorchathiram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

+1cc to M/S.S.Alagusundar, Advocate in SR.No.38025 +1cc to Special Government Pleader in SR.No.37935 ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.12779 of 2016 20.07.2016 gcg PA/SK-SKN/SAR II/20.07.2016/2P/5C (IT) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/