P.Rajakulapandian v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.03.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.AUTHINATHAN W.P(MD)No.5285 of 2017 P.Rajakulapandian .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, District Collector Office, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Superintendent of Police, District Superintendent Office, Tirunelveli District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Kadaiyam Police Station, Tirunelveli 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 thereby call for the records of third respondent in Na.Ka.No.6/Ka.Aa.A/ Ka.Va/17 dated 04.03.2017 and quash the same as arbitrary and illegal and further direct the respondent to grant permission to conduct cultural programme in connection with Thalaimalai Sastha Panguni Uthiram Festival to be held on 10.04.2017 at Mailapuram, Alankulam Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian For Respondents : Mr.K.Guru, 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 04.03.2017 passed by the third respondent and quash the same and also for directing the respondents to give necessary permission for conducting cultural 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.K.Guru, learned Additional Government Pleader, has

taken notice for the respondents.

3.It is seen from the records that the third respondent has rejected the representation alleged to have been given by the petitioner simply on the ground of communal clash. The third respondent has not specified any criminal case. Under the said circumstances, the reason assigned by the third respondent cannot be admitted and therefore this Court is inclined to pass the following order.

4.In fine, this writ petition is allowed in part without costs and the impugned order dated 04.03.2017 passed by the third respondent is quashed. The third respondent is directed to consider the representation alleged to have been given by the petitioner afresh and pass orders on merits within a period of two days.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Protocol) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Collector, District Collector Office, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Superintendent of Police, District Superintendent Office, Tirunelveli District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Kadaiyam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

+1 CC to M/s.P.GANAPATHI SUBRAMANIAN, Advocate, SR No. 17903 +1 CC to M/s.THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR No. 18408 SMN PSM/MMS/SAR2/28.03.2017/2P/6C ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.5285 of 2017 27.03.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/