Murugan. S v. The Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.09.2024 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR S.Murugan : Petitioner Vs.
1.The Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi District, Tenkasi.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Tenkasi Police Station, Tenkasi District.
: Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to provide permission and adequate police protection to the Vinayagar Chathurthi festival and procession, scheduled on 06.09.2024 to 08.09.2024 at the place of Arulmigu Sudalaimandan Temple, Madhakovil 2nd Street, Tenkasi by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 09.08.2024 and 27.08.2024 within stipulated time fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Muthurakkan 1/4
For Respondents : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor.
O R D E R
This writ petitioner filed this Writ Petition seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to provide permission and adequate police protection to the Vinayagar Chathurthi festival and procession, scheduled on 06.09.2024 to 08.09.2024 at the place of Arulmigu Sudalaimandan Temple, Madhakovil 2nd Street, Tenkasi by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 09.08.2024 and 27.08.2024 within stipulated time fixed by this Court.
2. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State would submit that they have already issued proceedings rejecting the petitioner's representation. He would further submit that they have already given permission for conducting festival at Esakkiamman Temple and the petitioner wanted to celebrate the festival at Madhakoil 2nd Street, which is situated near 100 meters of the said Esakkiamman Temple. 2/4
3. As already pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the said reason does not find place in the rejection order and the reason assigned is formal in nature.
4. Considering the above, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and the petitioner is directed to give fresh representation to the second respondent and on such receipt, the second respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders within two days from today.
5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
02.09.2024 NCC : Yes/ No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No das 3/4
K.MURALI SHANKAR, J das To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi District, Tenkasi.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Tenkasi Police Station, Tenkasi District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
Order made in 02.09.2024 4/4