Allowed

Karuppiah v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC16 Mar 2017WP(MD)/4472/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court directed the Superintendent of Police and Inspector of Police to provide necessary police protection for devotees attending the Panguni Uthiram festival on 09.04.2017 at Shri Karuppanna Swamy Temple, despite noting that the petitioner's Poojari rights cannot be determined in a writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents to provide necessary police protection for devotees attending the Panguni Uthiram Festival on 09.04.2017.

Karuppiah Vs the Superintendent of Police — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 16.03.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.4472 of 2017

Karuppiah

... Petitioner

-vs-

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

¶11

2.The Inspector of Police, Kattanur Police Station, Virudhunagar District. .. Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to give police protection to perform the pooja and other rituals in the eve of Panguni Uthiram festival going to the held on 09.04.2017 in Shri Karuppanna Swamy Temple situated at Mugavur Village, Thirusuli Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Robinson

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen Additional Government Pleader *****

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the Respondents to give police protection to perform the pooja and other rituals in the eve of Panguni Uthiram festival going to the held on 09.04.2017 in Shri Karuppanna Swamy Temple situated at Mugavur Village, Thirusuli Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

¶17

¶18

2.It is the case of the petitioner that he has got Poojari rights in Shri Karuppanna Swamy Temple situated at Mugavur Village, Thirusuli Taluk, Virudhunagar District and he has filed this writ petition for a direction to the respondents to give him police protection for the purpose of performing Poojas.

¶19

3.In the considered opinion of this Court Poojari rights https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ cannot be decided in a Writ Petition and the same has to be decided by Civil Court. However, learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the police will provide usual police

¶20

¶21

bandobust as required by the temple for the orderly conducting Panguni Uthiram Festival

¶22

4.Recording the said submission, the respondents are directed to provide necessary police protection for the devotees, who come for the Panguni Uthiram Festival on 09.04.2017.

¶23

5.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is closed. No costs.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(CS-II)

¶26

/True Copy/

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

¶29

1.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District,

¶30

Virudhunagar.

¶31

2.The Inspector of Police,

¶32

Kattanur Police Station,

¶33

Virudhunagar District.

¶34

+1CC to M/S.A.Robinson, Advocate, SR.No. 15989

¶35

+1CC to the Special Government Pleader SR.No. 15530

¶36

W.P.(MD) No.4472 of 2017

¶37

16.03.2017

¶38

¶39

AM/RR/27.03.2017/2P/5C

¶40

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

Karuppiah v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karuppiah 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

Chandrasekaran Vs the Inspector of Police

Vengateshwaran Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

S.Kumar Vs the Inspector of Police

S.Paramasivan, Vs the Commissioner

G.Kannan Vs the Commissioner of Police

Sivasakthibalan Vs Superintendent of Police