Allowed

S.Kaliappan, v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC12 Feb 2016WP/5277/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a writ petition filed for permission to conduct a cultural programme at a temple festival. It held that mere apprehension without material evidence of law and order problems is insufficient to reject the representation, granting the petition with specific conduct conditions.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is permitted to conduct the cultural programme on 07.03.2016 subject to eight enumerated conditions regarding content, timing, and conduct. The respondent is directed to issue the neces

S.Kaliappan, Vs The Inspector of Police — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 12.02.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH

¶5

W.P.No.5277 of 2016

¶6

S.Kaliappan ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The Inspector of Police, Edapadi Police Station, Salem District. ... Respondent

¶9

Prayer:

¶10

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent authority to give permission to conduct the cultural programme at Sri Ottapatti Sri Angalaparameswari Koil Thiruvizha on 07.03.2016 by considering the petitioner representation dated 08.02.2016.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.M.Dig Vijaya Pandian Additional Government Pleader O R D E R

¶13

By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶14

2.Seeking permission to conduct cultural programme on 07.03.2016 in Sri Ottapatti Sri Angalaparameswari Koil Thiruvizha, the petitioner made a representation dated 08.02.2016 to the respondent. As the same has not been considered, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶15

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

¶16

4.Learned Additional Government Pleader, on instructions, would submit that there is likelihood of law and order problem.

¶17

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

¶18

5.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 07.03.2016 in Sri Ottapatti Sri Angalaparameswari Koil Thiruvizha, however, with the following conditions:-

¶19

(a) The cultural programme in connection with temple Festival at Sri Ottapatti Sri Angalaparameswari Koil Thiruvizha, to be held on 07.03.2016 between 06.00 p.m. to 10.30 p.m.

¶20

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

¶21

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

(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

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

Further, the respondent is directed to issue necessary permission, incorporating the above conditions. No costs.

¶29

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CCC)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
The Inspector of Police,
Edapadi Police Station,
Salem District.
+1cc to Mr.R.P.Muruganraja, Advocate, S.R.No.9197
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.9362
W.P.No.5277 of 2016
bvr(CO)
srg(16/02/2016)

¶30

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

S.Kaliappan, v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Kaliappan, 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

K.Chellapandian, Vs The District Collector

B.Gopinath, Vs The Director

K.Maiyyan Vs the Commissioner of Police

Sarala Vs Chairman

Lingamoorthy Vs the Commissioner of Police

M/S.Sivam Associates, Rep. Vs the Managing Director