Karikalan v. The Superintendent Of Police,

W.P(MD). No.21777 of 2015 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.01.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)No.21777 of 2015 Karikalan ... Petitioner -vs1.The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thiruvidaimarudhur, Thanjavur District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Thiruppanandal Police Station, Thanjavur District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to remove the name of the petitioner from displaying as 'rowdy' in the Rowdy List Serial No.1/2010 in the third respondent police station. For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Karunanithi For Respondents :

Mr.A.Robinson Government Advocate (Crl.side)

O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

2.The petitioner is a practicing advocate. His name has been entered in the Rowdy List maintained by the third respondent police station. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the petitioner has shifted his residence to Kumbakonam and he is no longer residing in the station limits of the third respondent. 3.This writ petition was filed in the year 2015. I called upon the learned Government Advocate to produce the files and wanted to know as to whether the case of the petitioner was periodically reviewed. It is seen that the respondents have reviewed the case of the petitioner and directed the retention of his name in the history sheet on 31.12.2019. But this Court will have to see the manner in which the review was conducted.

It is seen that the third respondent has employed stereo typed expressions while seeking retention of the petitioner's name in the list. The superior officer has also mechanically endorsed the proposal of the third respondent. In the proposal seeking the retention of the petitioner's name in the rowdy list, particulars and details have not at all been spelt out. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.

W.P(MD). No.21777 of 2015 4.I am satisfied that there is a complete non application of mind on the side of the respondents in the matter of retention of the petitioner's name in the list. In this view of the matter, the order passed by the respondents for retention of the petitioner's name in the list is set aside and this Writ Petition is allowed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-I) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) pnn To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thiruvidaimarudhur, Thanjavur District.

3.The Inspector of Police, Thiruppanandal Police Station, Thanjavur District.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+1 CC to M/s.M.KARUNANITHI, Advocate ( SR-3478[F] dated 28/01/2020 ) W.P.(MD)No.21777 of 2015 28.01.2020 SMA/10/02/2020/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2