Partly allowed

R.Anandhakumar v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC15 Mar 2017WP(MD)/4155/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allows a writ petition filed for police permission to hold a cultural event 'Adal Padal' during the Panguni Pongal Festival. The court directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation within two days.

What did the court decide?

The second respondent is directed to look into the representation dated 03.03.2017 and dispose of the same within a period of two days.

R.Anandhakumar Vs the Superintendent of Police — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.03.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM

¶5

and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.AUTHINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD) No.4155 of 2017

¶7

R.Anandhakumar ... Petitioner

¶8

-vs-

¶9

1.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Usilampatti Police Station, Madurai District. ... Respondents

¶10

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to grant permission and protection for cultural event namely Adalpadal Scheduled to be held on 24.03.2017 at night in connection with Panguni Pongal Festival in Arulmigu Sri Vadakkuvatchiamman Arulmigu Muthalamman Kovil at Vilampatti Village, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District by consider the petitioner's representation dated 03.03.2017.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Ragavendran For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen Additional Government Pleader

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

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

¶14

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 Adal Padal programme in the place mentioned in the petition, by way of issuing a Writ of Mandamus.

¶15

2.It is seen from the records that on 03.03.2017, a representation has been given, but the same has not been considered. Under the said circumstances, this Court is inclined to pass the following order.

¶16

3.In fine, this Writ Petition is allowed in part without cost. The second respondent is directed to look into the representation dated 03.03.2017 and dispose of the same within a period of two days.

¶17

Sd/-

¶18

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

¶19

Assistant Registrar(CS-III)

¶20

/TRUE COPY/

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

¶23

¶24

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

¶25

2.The Inspector of Police, Usilampatti Police Station,

¶26

Madurai District.

¶27

+1 cc to M/R.R.RAGAVENDRAN, Advocate, SR.NO:14773 MJ

¶28

SVA/PM/PN/SAR2/16.03.2017/2P/4C

¶29

W.P(MD) No.4155 of 2017 15.03.2017

¶30

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

R.Anandhakumar v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Anandhakumar v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.S.Jeyakumaran Vs the District Collector

J.Brinso Raymond, S/O. Julius, Vs the District Collector

S.Pappathi Vs the Chief Secretary to

Narayanan Vs the Superintendent of Police

M.Varadharajan Vs the Superintendent of Police

K.K.Ramesh, Vs Union of India