Madras High CourtWP(MD)/16601/2016disposed of

P.Anandan, S/O. Ponnangan, v. The Deputy Superintendent Of

2016-09-01Honourable Dr. Justice S. Vimala2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 01.09.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE S.VIMALA W.P(MD)No.16601 of 2016 P.Anandan ... Petitioner -vs1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police Usilampatti, Madurai District.

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Usilampatti Town Police Station, Madurai District.

.. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent order dated nil and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to grant permission to conduct "Vinayagar Sathurthi from 04.09.2016 to 07.09.2016 at Nalluthevanpatti Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District and to give police protection.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Murugapandi For Respondent : Mr.R.Karthikeyan Addl. Govt. Pleader

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order of the 2nd respondent and to quash the same and for a consequential direction to the respondents to grant permission to conduct "Vinayagar Sathurthi from 04.09.2016 to 07.09.2016 at Nalluthevanpatti Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District and to give police protection.

2.Mr.R.Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.The learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for the respondent, would submit that the permission sought for

by the petitioner to erect a statue has been rejected on the ground that there is no permission for erecting a statute.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the statue, which is to be erected, is to be ultimately dissolved and not to be kept permanently in the said place and the 2nd respondent has passed the rejection order only under misconception.

6. Under such circumstances, the order passed by the 2nd respondent is set aside and the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law on or before, 04.09.2016. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/ Assistant Registrar(Records) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar(AE) To 1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police Usilampatti, Madurai District.

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Usilampatti Town Police Station, Madurai District.

3.The Additional Govt.Pleader, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+1cc to M/S.P.Murugapandi, Advocate in SR.No.49092 W.P(MD)No.16601 of 2016 01.09.2016 RR PA/SS-3/SAR AE/01.09.2016/2P/5C (IT) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/