Partly allowed

J.K.Ramesh, S/O.Kasipandi v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC10 Mar 2017WP(MD)/4130/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a writ of Mandamus under Article 226 to direct the second respondent to permit a kabadi tournament during a village festival. The court allowed the petition in part, directing authorities to dispose of the pending representation within two days.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent to consider the representation dated 08.03.2017 and dispose of it within two days.

J.K.Ramesh, S/O.Kasipandi Vs the… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 10.03.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM

¶6

and

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.AUTHINATHAN

¶8

W.P(MD)No.4130 of 2017

¶9

J.K.Ramesh .. Petitioner

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶12

2.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Pavoorchatram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

¶13

.. Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent herein to grant permission for conducting Kabadi tournament in the eve of Chettiyur Kaliamman Kovil Masi Perum Thiruvizha festival at Chettiyur Village, Pavoorchatram, Tirunelveli District from 18.03.2017 at 10.00 pm to 19.03.2017 at 02.00 pm based on the petitioner's representation dated 08.03.2017 and pass such further or other orders.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Alagusundar For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen, Additional Government Pleader.

¶16

ORDER

¶17

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

¶18

This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the respondents to give necessary permission for conducting kabadi tournament in the place mentioned in the petition, by way of issuing a writ of Mandamus.

¶19

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

¶20

3.It is seen from the records that on 08.03.2017 a https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ representation has been given, but the same has not been considered. Under the said circumstances, this Court is inclined to pass the following order.

¶21

¶22

4.In fine, this writ petition is allowed in part without costs and the second respondent is directed to look into the representation dated 08.03.2017 and dispose of the same within a period of two days.

¶23

Sd/ Assistant Registrar(C.O.) /True Copy/

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar.

¶25

¶26

1.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli. 2.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Pavoorchatram Police Station, Tirunelveli District. +1CC to the Special Government Pleader, SR.No. 14091 +1CC to M/S.S.Alagusundar, Advocate, SR.No. 14292

¶27

ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.4130 of 2017 10.03.2017

¶28

ps AM/SV MMS/SAR-2/13.03.2017/2P/5C

¶29

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

J.K.Ramesh, S/O.Kasipandi v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J.K.Ramesh, S/O.Kasipandi v. the Superintendent 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

Vasanthi Vs the Inspector of Police

O.Ukirapandian Vs the Corporation of Madurai

S.Jothi Vs the District Collector

M.a.Joe Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Kds.Somasundaram, Vs the District Collector

N.Mariyappan Vs the Executive Officer