Allowed

N.Periasamy v. State Rep. by Inspector of

Madras HC11 Jan 2016WP/999/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition seeking permission for a cultural program at a temple festival. Rejecting the respondent's claim of likely law and order disturbances without evidence, the Court permitted the program subject to nine conditions regarding time, content, and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; petitioner permitted to conduct the cultural program; respondent directed to issue permission incorporating specific conditions regarding time, content, and conduct.

N.Periasamy Vs State Rep. by Inspector of — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 11.1.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

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

¶5

W.P.No.999 of 2016

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Inspector of Police Sithode Police Station Erode District

¶8

.. Respondents

¶9

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to give permission to conduct the dance programme in the event of Arulmigu Pazhaiyur Mariamman Temple festival on 19.1.2016 at West Street Kothukaran Pudur, R.N.Pudur Post, Erode District.

¶10

For Petitioner .. Mr. D.Uma Devi For Respondents .. Mr.A.Kumar Special Government Pleader

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Seeking permission to conduct cultural programme on 19.1.2016 in the event of Arulmigu Pazhaiyur Mariamman Temple festival at West Street Kothukaran Pudur, R.N.Pudur Post, Erode District, the petitioner made a representation dated 07.01.2016 to the respondent. As the same has not been considered, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

conduct cultural programme on 19.1.2016 in the event of Arulmigu Pazhaiyur Mariamman Temple festival at West Street Kothukaran Pudur, R.N.Pudur Post, Erode District, however, with the following conditions:-

¶18

(a) The cultural programme in connection with temple festival of Arulmigu Pazhaiyur Mariamman Temple at West Street Kothukaran Pudur, R.N.Pudur Post, Erode District, be held on 19.1.2016 between 06.00 p.m and 10.30 p.m.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

(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

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

True Copy

¶28

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶29

kua

¶30

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

¶31

¶32

Inspector of Police Sithode Police Station Erode District

¶33

+1 cc to Mr.C.S.Saravanan Advocate sr.1961

¶34

W.P.No.999 of 2016

¶35

rsy(co)
aa12/01/2016

¶36

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

N.Periasamy v. State Rep. by Inspector of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Periasamy v. State Rep. by Inspector of

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

S.Saruvagan Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

V.Sakthi Vs The District Collector

R.N.Durai, Vs The Inspector of Police (L&O)

C.Ongali Vs The District Revenue Officer

M.Damodaran Vs The District Collector

Settu @ Muniappan Vs The Tahsildar