Allowed

K.Genesan @ Palanisamy, v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC25 Jan 2016WP/2474/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the High Court at Madras allowed the petition and granted permission to the petitioner to conduct a cultural programme at a temple fair, directing the police to issue necessary permission subject to specific conditions to ensure public order and harmony.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; permission granted to conduct the cultural programme on 28.01.2016 subject to specific conditions regarding time, content, and public order.

K.Genesan @ Palanisamy, Vs The Inspector of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 25.01.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH

¶5

W.P.No.2474 of 2016

¶6

K.Ganesan @ Palanisamy

¶7

.. Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Inspector of Police, Thiruchengodu Town Police Station, Namakkal District.

¶10

Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authority to give permission to conduct the cultural programme at Cheetharampalayam Sri Mariamman Koil Thiruvizha on 28.01.2016 by considering the petitioner representation dated 20.01.2016.

¶11

Seeking permission to conduct cultural programme on 28.01.2016 at Sri Mariamman Koil Thiruvizha, Cheetharamapalayam, Thiruchengodu Taluk, Namakkal District, the petitioner made a representation dated 20.01.2016 to the respondent. As the same has not been considered, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶12

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.

¶13

A mere apprehension cannot be a ground to reject the representation. There is absolutely no material before this Court to hold that there will be a law and order problem in the event of permission being granted. In such view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed and the petitioner is permitted to conduct cultural programme on 28.01.2016 at Sri Mariamman Koil

¶14

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

¶15

Thiruvizha, Cheetharamapalayam, Thiruchengodu Taluk, Namakkal District, however, with the following conditions:-

¶16

(a) The cultural programme in connection with temple Festival at Sri Mariamman Koil Thiruvizha, Cheetharamapalayam, Thiruchengodu Taluk, Namakkal District, be held on 28.01.2016 between 06.00 p.m and 10.30 p.m.

¶17

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

¶18

(c)Double meaning songs should not be played so as to spoil the minds of students and youths.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

(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

¶23

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

¶24

(i)The respondent is directed to issue necessary permission, incorporating the above conditions. No costs.

/true copy/

Sub Asst. Registrar

sgl

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

¶29

¶30

The Inspector of Police, Thiruchengodu Town Police Station, Namakkal District.

¶31

1 cc to Mr.R.P. Murugan Raja, Advocate, Sr. 4412 W.P.No.2474 of 2016

¶32

VS (CO)
kk 25/1

¶33

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

K.Genesan @ Palanisamy, v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Genesan @ Palanisamy, v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.Prema Vs The District Collector

R.Nagaraj, Vs The Tahsildar

Gopal Vs The Chairman

Kongu Nadu Vettuva Gounder Vs The District Collector

Y.Jayasingh Vs Presidency College

V.Palanivelu Vs Joint Sub Inspector