Madras High CourtWP(MD)/5540/2017partly allowed

A.Ganthi v. The Superintendent Of Police

2017-04-03Honourable Mr Justice N. Authinathan,Honourable Mr Justice A. Selvam2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 03.04.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.AUTHINATHAN W.P(MD)No.5540 of 2017 A.Gandhi .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of The Superintendent of Police, Theni District.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Periyakulam Taluk (I/c), Theni District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Devathanpatty Police Station, Periyakulam, Theni District.

.. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the second respondent dated 22.03.2017 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to grant permission to conduct the Adal Padal Programme on 07.04.2017. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Senthil Kumar For Respondents : Mr.M.Govindan, Special 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 22.03.2017 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and also for directing the respondents to grant permission for conducting Adalpadal Programme in the place mentioned in the petition, by way of issuing a writ of certiorari. 2.Mr.M.Govindan, learned Special Government Pleader, has taken notice for the respondents.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.It is seen from the records that the second respondent has rejected the permission simply on the ground of law and order

problem. The reason assigned by the second respondent is not proper and therefore the impugned order passed by the second respondent is liable to be quashed.

4.In fine, this writ petition is allowed in part without costs and the impugned order dated 22.03.2017 passed by the second respondent is quashed. The second respondent is directed to consider the representation dated 20.03.2017 afresh and pass suitable orders within a period of two days.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(PROTOCOL) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Office of The Superintendent of Police, Theni District.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Office of The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Periyakulam Taluk (I/c), Theni District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Devathanpatty Police Station, Periyakulam, Theni District.

+1cc to M/S.R.Senthil Kumar, Advocate SR.No.18700 ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.5540 of 2017 JM/SV MMS/SAR 4/05.04.2017/2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/