Disposed

G.Prem Anand v. the Managing Director

Madras HC6 Feb 2018WP/28706/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition to quash a notice regarding a permanent median erection and sought a direction to remove it for temple car processions. The court accepted the respondent's submission that the median is removed only during specific festivals upon police permission and closed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed by the court.

G.Prem Anand Vs the Managing Director — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 06.02.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶5

W.P.No.28706 of 2013 and M.P.Nos.1/2013 & 1/2014

G.Prem Anand

...Petitioner

Versus

The Managing Director Chennai Metro Rail Limited, 11/6, Seethamma Road,

¶10

Alwarpet, Chennai-18 .. Respondent

¶11

Prayer: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned notice No.133/LND/CMRL/2011 dated 18.01.2013 issued by the respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to take necessary action to remove the median erected permanently by the respondent thereby not preventing the procession of taking the temple cars in Punguni Festival and also in Garuda Seva festival and other routine festivals and processions.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Narendran

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.Jayesh B.Dolia

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The writ petition has been filed challenging the order of the respondent dated 18.01.2013, and for consequent direction directing the respondent to take necessary action to remove the median erected permanently by the respondent thereby not preventing the procession of the temple cars in Punguni Festival and also in Garuda Seva festival and other routine festivals and processions.

¶16

2 Heard Mr. S.Narendran, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Jayesh B. Dolia, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the records.

¶17

In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, it is stated that the functions are celebrated on particular days

¶18

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

¶19

only and for that purpose, the median cannot be removed permanently and the same would be removed when the temple car travels on the road upon obtaining of the police permission for removal of such median by the petitioner.

¶20

4 The learned standing counsel for the respondent further submitted that the respondent has put up a temporary iron sliding gate and the key was also handed over to the temple authority and at the time of festival, the respondent has no objection for taking the car through that area.

¶21

5 Recording the above submission of the learned counsel
for the respondent, this writ petition is closed. No costs.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also
closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rpl
To
The Managing Director
Chennai Metro Rail Limited,
11/6, Seethamma Road,
Alwarpet, Chennai-18
+1cc to Mr.Jayesh B.Dolia , Advocate, S.R.No.10236
+1cc to Mr.R.Narendran, Advocate, S.R.No. 8656

¶22

W.P.No.28706 of 2013 CS/28/02/18

¶23

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

G.Prem Anand v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Prem Anand v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jkm Boxing Club Vs The Commissioner

M/s.Ashok Nandavanam Vs The Special Officer

S.M.Elumalai, Vs The District Collector

C.Manikandan Vs the Executive Engineer

I.Raju Vs the Asst. Superintendent

A.Govindarajan, Vs the Chief Administrate Officer