Allowed

Thangavel, v. the Supdt. of Police

Madras HC20 Mar 2015WP(MD)/3947/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Public Interest Litigation under Article 226, the Court quashed the respondent's inaction and directed the police to grant permission for a cultural programme, imposing strict conditions to ensure law and order, prevent obscenity, and maintain communal harmony.

What did the court decide?

Permission is granted for the cultural programme between 6.00 p.m. and 10.30 p.m. on 22.03.2015 subject to conditions prohibiting obscenity, political/religious content, and flex boards, with police a

Thangavel, Vs the Supdt. of Police — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 20.03.2015

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE S.TAMILVANAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.S.RAVI

¶6

W.P(MD)No.3947 of 2015

¶7

Thangavel ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Superintendent of Police, Trichy.

¶10

The Inspector of Police, Siruganur Police Station, Trichy District. ... Respondents

¶11

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, thereby directing the 2nd Respondent to grant permission to perform of cultural programme (Karakattam) to be celebrated on 22.03.2015 on the basis of the petitioner representation dated 18.03.2015 in connection with the Panguni Festival at Arulmigu Samayapuram Sri Mari Amman Kovil Siruganur Village and Manachanallur Taluk Trichy District.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Baskarapandian, Special Government Pleader.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

(Order of the Court was made by S.TAMILVANAN,J)

¶15

This writ petition has been filed as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking an order in the nature of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to grant permission and necessary protection to perform the cultural programme (ie.) Dance Programme, on 22.03.2015 at 7.00 p.m., in the festival of Arulmigu Samayapuram Sri Mari Amman Kovil Siruganur Village, Manachanallur Taluk, Trichy District.

¶16

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶17

¶18

3.Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the Secretary of Festival Committee of Arulmigu Samayapuram Sri Mari Amman Kovil, Siruganur Village, Manachanallur Taluk, Trichy District and every year temple festival is being conducted by the villagers and this year also, the villagers jointly decided to conduct the village temple festival, with 'cultural programme' on 22.03.2015. In this connection, a representation was given on 18.03.2015 to the 2^nd respondent, with a request to grant permission to conduct 'Cultural Programme on 22.03.2015, however no order was passed by the 2^nd respondent on the said representation and hence the petitioner is before this Court with this writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that as the temple festival is celebrated in a peaceful manner by the villagers, there will be no untoward incident by the people of the village.

¶19

4.Mr.A.K.Baskarapandian, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, on instructions, would submit that the permission sought for by the petitioner may be granted with stringent conditions for maintaining law and order and also to avoid any untoward incident during performance of such programme.

¶20

5.Having considered the facts and circumstances and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, we are of the view that necessary permission shall be granted to the petitioner and his villagers to conduct 'cultural programme' in connection with Arulmigu Samayapuram Sri Mari Amman Kovil, Siruganur Village, Manachanallur Taluk, Trichy District, on 22.03.2015 between 6.00 p.m. and 10.30 p.m., however, with the following conditions:-

¶21

6.Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶22

(a)The cultural programme in connection with Arulmigu Samayapuram Sri Mari Amman Kovil, Siruganur Village, Manachanallur Taluk, Trichy District festival be held on 22.03.2015 between 6.00 p.m. and 10.30 p.m.

¶23

(b)There should not be any kind of obscene dance or vulgar dialogues during the performance, by anyone of the participants;

¶24

(c)Double meaning songs should not be played so as to spoil the minds of students and youths https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶25

¶26

(d)No dance or songs, touching upon any political party or religion or community or caste be played.

¶27

(e)No flex boards in support of any political party or religious leader be erected.

¶28

(f)The function should not affect either religious or communal harmony and shall be conducted without any discrimination based on caste.

¶29

(g)If there is any violation of any one of the conditions imposed, the concerned police officer is at liberty to take necessary action, as per law and stop such performance; and

¶30

(h)Similarly, the police is entitled to stop the dance programme, if it exceeds beyond the permitted time.

¶31

(i)The second respondent is directed to issue necessary permission, incorporating the above conditions.

¶32

No order as to costs.

¶33

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Per.Admn.)

¶34

/True Copy/

¶35

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶36

¶37

1.The Superintendent of Police, Trichy.

¶38

2.The Inspector of Police, Siruganur Police Station, Trichy District.

¶39

+1cc to Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian, Advocate, in SR. No.13633/15.

¶40

W.P(MD)No.3947 of 2015 20.03.2015

¶41

sms

¶42

msm 20.03.2015 p3/4c(IT)

¶43

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Thangavel, v. the Supdt. of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thangavel, v. the Supdt. of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., Vs the Assistant Commissioner

The General Manager, Vs S.Rajkamal

Murugan Vs the District Collector

A.Sithan Vs the Superintendent of Police

I.Sabeer Mohamed Vs the Principal Secretary

Palani, Vs the Supdt. of Police