Disposed

G.Jayaraman v. The Sub Inspector of Police

Madras HC7 Sept 2017WP/24095/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to grant permission for a cultural program on 08.09.2017. Relying on a prior Division Bench order, this Single Judge directed the respondent to consider the representation and pass orders on merits immediately.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders on merits today.

G.Jayaraman Vs The Sub Inspector of Police — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 07.09.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

W.P.No.24095 of 2017

¶6

G.Jayaraman ... Petitioner

¶7

¶8

The Sub Inspector of Police Jollarpettai Police station Jollarpettai, Vellore District ... Respondent

¶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 the petitioner to conduct a Cultural Program (Adalum Padalum) schedule to be held on 08.09.2017 at "Katteriamman Temple" at No.100, Ex Thalaivar Vattam, Ammaiyappan Nagar, Jollarpettai, Pakirithaka, Vellore District 635 853 by considering the petitioner representation dated 19.08.2017.

¶10

For Petitioner : Ms.K.Priya

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.S.N.Parthasarathi

¶12

Government Advocate

¶13

Mr.S.N.Parthasarathi, learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the respondent.

¶14

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to give permission to him to conduct a Cultural Program (Adalum Padalum) scheduled to be held on 08.09.2017 at "Katteriamman Temple" at No.100, Ex Thalaivar Vattam, Ammaiyappan Nagar, Jollarpettai, Pakirithaka, Vellore District 635 853 by considering his representation dated 19.08.2017.

¶15

3.It is the case of the petitioner that in spite of the representation being given to the respondent on 19.08.2017 for conducting cultural programme in the Temple on 08.09.2017, the respondent has not passed orders till today.

¶16

4.A Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(MD).No.3773 of 2017 by order dated 03.03.2017 in similar circumstances directed the

¶17

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

¶18

respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner therein and dispose of the same.

¶19

5.Following the order passed by the Division Bench, I direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.08.2017 and pass orders, on merits and in accordance with law, today itself.

¶20

With this observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶21

Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (CS IV )
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
To
1.The Sub Inspector of Police
Jollarpettai Police station
Jollarpettai, Vellore District
2.Thro
The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.(To Take further action)
+1cc to M/s.K.Priya, Advocate in sr.no.64758
W.P.No.24095 of 2017
SS(CO)
NR 07/09/2017

¶22

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

G.Jayaraman v. The Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Jayaraman v. The Sub 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

R.P.Motors, Vs The Registering Authority-Cum-

Mr.K.Subba Reddy, Vs State of Tamil Nadu

B.Sivakumar, Vs The Branch Manager

M/s. F5- The Revitalising Spa Vs The Commissioner of Police

N.K.Kalidasan Vs the Member Secretary

V.Jayakumar Vs the Tamilnadu Electricity