A.Naga Thevar v. The Deputy Superintendent Of
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.06.2016
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE S.VIMALA W.P(MD) No.9682 of 2016 A.Naga Thevar ... Petitioner -vs1.
The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Usilampatti, Madurai District.
2.
The Inspector of Police, Checkkanurani Police Station, Checkkanurani, Madurai District.
3.
The Sub-Inspector of Police, Vikkiramangalam Police Station, Vikkiramangalam, Madurai District. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent dated 28.05.2016 and quash the same in so far as declining permission for the Adal Padal Programme scheduled on 05.06.2016 and issue a consequential direction to the 3rd Respondent to provide police protection and permission to the said programme. For Petitioner :
Mr.N.Dilipkumar For Respondents :
Mr.D.Muruganandam, Addl. Govt. Pleader *****
O R D E R
The writ petition has been filed to quash the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent dated 28.05.2016 with the consequential direction to the 3rd respondent to provide police protection and permission to the Adal Padal programme, scheduled to be held on 05.06.2016.
2. Mr.D.Muruganandam, 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.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the programme is being conducted by the villagers regularly in order to promote harmony during the above said https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
festival period. He would further submit that the representation given to the third respondent was rejected vide the impugned order.
5. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent would submit that considering the law and problem prevalent in the area, the permission for conducting the programme was rejected.
6. However, the reasons alleged may not exist as of now and as the situation is liable to change, the petitioner is permitted to make a fresh representation.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation to the third respondent in person on 04.06.2016 and on receipt of such representation, the third respondent is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders on merits and as per law immediately, as the function is stated to be scheduled on 05.06.2016, .
With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/ Assistant Registrar(CS-I) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar.
To:
1.
The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Usilampatti, Madurai District.
2.
The Inspector of Police, Checkkanurani Police Station, Checkkanurani, Madurai District.
3.
The Sub-Inspector of Police, Vikkiramangalam Police Station, Vikkiramangalam, Madurai District.
4.
The Additional Government Pleader, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1CC to M/S. N.Dilip Kumar, Advocate, SR.No. 27411 +1CC to the Special Government Pleader, SR.No.27564 W.P(MD)No.9682 of 2016 02.06.2016 ar AM/AAL.MPA/SAR-I/03.06.2016/2P/7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/