Madras High CourtWP(MD)/21442/2024dismissed

P.Ramselva @ Selva Vignesh v. The District Collector

2024-09-06Honourable Mr Justice K.Murali Shankar4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATE : 06.09.2024 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR P.Ramselva @ Selva Vignesh : Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, O/o.The District Collector, Theni District.

2.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Theni District.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Uthamapalayam Revenue Division, Theni District.

4.The Tahsildar, O/o.The Tahsildar, Uthamapalayam, Theni District.

5.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o.the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Uthamapalayam, Theni District.

6.The Inspector of Police, Uthamapalayam Police Station, Theni District.

: Respondents 1/4

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records connected with the order, dated 04.09.2024 in Na.ka.No. 09/Ka.Aa.A/U.Va.Ka.Ni/2024 issued by the sixth respondent and quash the same, consequently, directing the respondents to grant permission and police protection to install Vinayagar idol in front of Uthamapalayam Temple car and take out in procession on 07.09.2024 as part of Vinayagar Chathurti festival.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Malaikani, For Respondents : Mr.M.Muthu Manikkam, Government Advocate (Civil Side), for R1, R3 and R4.

: Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor, for R2, R5 and R6.

O R D E R

The Writ Petition is directed against the order, dated 04.09.2024 in Na.ka.No.09/Ka.Aa.A/U.Va.Ka.Ni/2024 issued by the sixth respondent and consequently, to direct the respondents to grant permission and police protection to install Vinayagar idol in front of Uthamapalayam Temple car and take out in procession on 07.09.2024 as part of Vinayagar Chathurti festival.

2/4

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State would submit that the petitioner is having 13 cases and that more importantly, he has made Facebook posts that disrupts the religious harmony and for that a case came to be registered in Crime No.16 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 153(A), 295(A) and 505(2) IPC and the same is pending for investigation.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order rejecting the petitioner's representation cannot be found fault with. Hence, this Court concludes that the Writ Petition is devoid of merits and the same the same is liable to be dismissed.

5. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. 06.09.2024 NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No das 3/4

K.MURALI SHANKAR, J DAS To 1.The District Collector, O/o.The District Collector, Theni District.