S.Jeyaraman, v. The Superintendent Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.02.2018

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM W.P.(MD) No.24081 of 2017 S. Jeyaraman ... Petitioner -Vs1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o the Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Athirampattinam Police Station, Thanjavur District.

... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records connect with the impugned order passed by the respondent no. 2 in Na.Ka.No.15/ Athirai Ka.Ni/2017 dated 08.11.2017 and quash the same as illegal, consequently to direct the respondent no.1 to grant permission for conduct fasting agitation on 27.12.2017 at 3.00 pm to 7.00 pm or any other date at near the Athirampattinam Bus stand on the basis of the petitioner representation dated 15.12.2017. For Petitioner : Mr. R. Alagumani For Respondent : Mr.V.Anand Government Advocate

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed to quash the order passed by the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.15 / Athirai Ka.Ni / 2017, dated 08.11.2017 and consequently, direct the respondent no.1 to grant permission for conducting fasting agitation on 27.12.2017 at 3.00 p.m., to 7.00 p.m., or any other date near the Athirampattinam Bus stand.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that one Senthil Kumar and his family members were arrested by the Inspector of Police, Athirampattinam, violating the principles of natural justice and hence, the petitioner being a https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Deputy Secretary of Makkal Viduthalai Munnani organization has decided to conduct fasting agitation near the Athirampattinam Busstand and hence, he has submitted an application before the second respondent on 06.11.2017 and the same has been rejected by the second respondent, without assigning any valid reason and hence, the said order has to be set aside.

3. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents has submitted that since there is a heavy traffic near the Athirampattinam Bus-stand and also there is a Pallivasal and if the permission is granted to the petitioner for conducting fasting agitation, that would cause in-convenience to the public and hence, the second respondent has rightly rejected the petitioner's request.

4. The impugned order is perused. In that order the second respondent has stated that in the bus-stand of Athirampattinam there is a taxi stand and also a heavy traffic and Pallivasal is also there and if the permission is granted to the petitioner for conducting fasting agitation, that would cause inconvenience to the public. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to give a fresh representation to the second respondent on or before 18.02.2018, by mentioning some other place and on submission of such representation, the second respondent is directed to consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of two days, thereafter.

5. With the aforesaid observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Crl.Side) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o the Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Athirampattinam Police Station, Thanjavur District. +One cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR.No.47425 +One cc to Mr.R.Alagumani, Advocate, SR.No.47193 trp RL/5C/2P/SKN/RSK/SAR2/9/3/2018 W.P.(MD) No.24081 of 2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 08.02.2018