Disposed

T.Rajamani, v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC20 Apr 2017WP/9659/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order directs the respondent police authorities to consider the petitioners' representations and pass orders on merits regarding the grant of permission for two temple festivals on specified dates, acknowledging a prior direction from a Division Bench.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to consider representations and pass orders on merits by the dates of the festivals.

T.Rajamani, Vs The Inspector of Police — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 20.04.2017

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM

¶5

W.P.Nos.9659 and 9660 of 2017

¶6

T.Rajamani ... Petitioner in W.P.9659 of 2017 D.Govindharaj ... Petitioner in W.P.9660 of 2017

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The Inspector of Police, Kottapatti Police Station, Kottapatti, Dharmapuri District.

¶9

... Respondent in W.P.9659 of 2017

¶10

The Inspector of Police, Thirupattur Police Station, Thirupattur, Vellore District.

¶11

... Respondent in W.P.9660 of 2017

¶12

Prayer in W.P.No.9659 of 2017:

¶13

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to grant permission and police protection to conduct “Gramiya Kalai Nigazhchi” scheduled to be held on 24.04.2017 on the eve of Arulmigu Sri Mariamman Temple festival situate at Valanur, Valanur Post, Aarur Taluk, Dharmapuri District based on my representation dated 15.04.2017 to conduct the festival.

¶14

Prayer in W.P.No.9660 of 2017:

¶15

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to grant permission and police protection to conduct “Gramiya Kalai Nigazhchi” scheduled to be held on 25.04.2017 on the eve of Arulmigu Sri Kottaikaliamman Temple festival situate at Palayapalayam, Palayapalayam Post, Puthunadu via, Thirupattur Taluk, Vellore District based on my representation dated 10.04.2017 to conduct the festival.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Sathyaseelan For Respondent : Mr.K.Balamurugan Government Advocate

¶17

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

¶18

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶19

The petitioners have filed the above writ petitions to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to give permission to conduct “Gramiya Kalai Nigazhchi” at Arulmigu Sri Mariamman Temple festival situate at Valanur, Valanur Post, Aarur Taluk, Dharmapuri District and Arulmigu Sri Kottaikaliamman Temple festival situate at Palayapalayam, Palayapalayam Post, Puthunadu via, Thirupattur Taluk, Vellore District respectively, in connection with the festival of Arulmigu Sri Mariamman Temple and Arulmigu Sri Kottaikaliamman Temple respectively, on 24.04.2017 and 25.04.2017 respectively, by considering his representation dated 15.04.2017 and 10.04.2017 respectively.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Government Advocate.

¶21

It is the case of the petitioners that inspite of the representation being given to the respondent on 15.04.2017 and 10.04.2017 respectively, for conducting “Gramiya Kalai Nigazhchi”, the respondent has not passed orders till today.

¶22

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 respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and dispose of the same.

¶23

Following the order passed by the Division Bench, this Court directs the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.04.2017 and 10.04.2017 respectively and pass orders, on merits and in accordance with law, on or before 24.04.2017 and 25.04.2017 respectively. This Court makes it clear that the fact of the order being issued today shall not weigh with the authority concerned and the authority shall take a decision solely upon merits.

¶24

6.With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶25

Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶26

//True Copy//

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

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

¶29

¶30

1.The Inspector of Police, Kottapatti Police Station, Kottapatti, Dharmapuri District.

¶31

2.The Inspector of Police, Thirupattur Police Station, Thirupattur, Vellore District.

¶32

+2cc to Mr.T. Sathya Seelan, Advocate, S.R.No.24200, 24199
ks(CO)
md(21/04/2017)
W.P.Nos.9659 and 9660 of 2017

¶33

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

T.Rajamani, v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Rajamani, 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

Tmt.R.Subalakshmi, Vs T.Ramsingh

K.Muniyammal, Aged 62 Years, Vs Sivanandan

Kanagaraj Vs The Superintendent of Police

M.Sundarajan Vs the Insector of Police

Iyyammal Vs the Assistant Commissioner of

Vinoth Kumar, Vs Inspector of Police