R.Dhavamani v. The Superintendent Of Police,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.02.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN W.P(MD)No.2957 of 2017 R.Dhavamani .. Petitioner Vs.
1. The Superintendent of Police, O/o The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.
2. The Inspector of Police, Chekkanurani Police Station, Chekkanurani, Madurai District.
3. The Sub Inspector of Police, Vikramangalam Police Station, Vikramangalam, Madurai 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 with the order dated 16.02.2017 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and consequently directing the second respondent to give police protection for conducting Cultural Programme namely Adal Padal Kalai Nikalchi on account of Maha Sivarathiri Festival in Angalesswari and Karuppusamy temple, Vikramangalam Village, Madurai District on 25.02.2017.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Vijayanand For Respondents : Mr.D.Muruganandam, 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 impugned order dated 16.02.2017 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and also for directing the respondents to give permission for conducting Adalpadal Programme in the place mentioned in the petition, by way of issuing a writ of certiorarified mandamus.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.Mr.D.Muruganandam, learned Additional Government Pleader, has taken notice for the respondents.
3.It is seen from the records that the second respondent has rejected the representation given by the petitioner on the ground that the actors would wear dress which create obscenity and also they tried to act as politicians..
4.Considering the reason given by the second respondent, this Court is of the view that the reason given by the second respondent is not proper for rejecting the representation. Under the said circumstances, the impugned order dated 16.02.2017 is liable to be quashed.
5.In fine, this writ petition is allowed without costs and the impugned order dated 16.02.2017 passed by the second respondent is quashed. The second respondent is directed to consider the representation alleged to have been given by the petitioner and dispose of the same within a period of two days and if there is any scene of obscenity, the second respondent is directed to take appropriate action as per law. Sd/- Assistant Registrar /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To
1. The Superintendent of Police, O/o The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.
2. The Inspector of Police, Chekkanurani Police Station, Chekkanurani, Madurai District.
3. The Sub Inspector of Police, Vikramangalam Police Station, Vikramangalam, Madurai District.
+1 CC to Mr.K.Vijayanand, SR NO: 9531 +1 CC to M/S.SPL.GOVT.PLEADER, SR NO: 9668 smn MS-PM-SAR 3/23.2.2017/2P-6C ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.2957 of 2017 21.02.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/