← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/5654/2017partly allowed

Chellasamy v. The Deputy Superintendent Of

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.5654 of 2017 Chellasamy .. Petitioner Vs.

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

2.The Inspector of Police, Puliangudi 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 calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Proceedings in Na.Ka.No.08/PIPS/2017 dated 27.03.2017 and quash the same as arbitrary illegal and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to grant permission for perform cultural programme in the festival of Arulmigu Sri Mari Amman, Sri Kaliamman Temple Panguni Festival at Duraisamiyapuram, Puliyangudi Taluk, Madurai District on 05.04.2017.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sukumar For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen, 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 27.03.2017 passed by the second respondent and quash the same and also for directing the respondents to give permission for conducting Cultural Programme in the place mentioned in the petition, by way of issuing a writ of certiorarified mandamus.

2.Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen, learned Additional 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 27.03.2017 passed by the second respondent is quashed. The second respondent is directed to consider the representation dated 22.03.2017 afresh and pass suitable orders within a period of two days.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(T&P) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Puliyangudi, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Puliangudi Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

+1CC to M/S.S.Sukumar, Advocate, SR.No. 18979 ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.5654 of 2017 smn KK/SKN RSK/SAR-3/03.04.2017/2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/