Allowed

R.Chinna Sundaraiya, v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC9 Mar 2017WP(MD)/4084/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition under Article 226 sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent police officer to grant permission for a cultural 'Adal Padal' program and provide police protection. The court allowed the petition in part, directing the respondent to consider the pending representation within two days.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition allowed in part; respondent directed to consider the representation dated 03.03.2017 and dispose of it within two days.

R.Chinna Sundaraiya, Vs the Inspector of Police — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 09.03.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.AUTHINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.4084 of 2017

R.Chinna Sundaraiya

.. Petitioner

Vs.

The Inspector of Police, Sankarankovil Police Station, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

¶11

.. Respondent

¶12

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to grant permission to perform the cultural program of Adal Padal on 30.03.2017 night at Sri Maruthudaiyar Sastha Kovil, Irummankulam, Vadakkupudur Post, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District and to provide adequate police protection based on the petitioner's representation dated 03.03.2017.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Bharathi For Respondent : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen, Additional Government Pleader.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

[Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM, J. ]

¶16

This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the respondent to give necessary permission for conducting Adalpadal programme in the place mentioned therein, by way of issuing a writ of mandamus.

¶17

2.Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen, learned Additional Government Pleader, has taken notice for the respondent.

¶18

3.It is seen from the records that on 03.03.2017 a representation has been given, but the same has not been https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ considered. Under the said circumstances, this Court is inclined to pass the following order.

¶19

¶20

4.In fine, this writ petition is allowed in part without costs and the respondent is directed to look into the representation dated 03.03.2017 and dispose of the same within a period of two days.

¶21

Sd/Assistant Registrar (AS)

¶22

/True Copy/

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

smn

¶25

¶26

The Inspector of Police, Sankarankovil Police Station, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

¶27

+1CC to Mr.S.Bharathi, Advocate Sr.No.13522 +1CC to Spl.Government Pleader Sr.No.13727

¶28

GJM/SV/MMS/SAR-2-13.3.17-2p-4C

¶29

ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.4084 of 2017 09.03.2017

¶30

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

R.Chinna Sundaraiya, v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Chinna Sundaraiya, 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

Thayas Vs the Superintendent of Police

M.Subramanian, Vs the District Collector

R.Abraham Vs the Director

A.Thangaraj Vs Sundaragopal

A.Manickavasagam, Vs the District Collector

S.Ramesh Kumar Vs the Principal Secretary