Disposed

K.Malaiyandi v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC5 Oct 2018WP(MD)/20950/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking mandamus for police protection for T.T.V. Dinakaran at a festival. The Court directed the second respondent to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders, disposing of the petion with no costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders.

K.Malaiyandi Vs the Superintendent of Police — Madras HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 05.10.2018

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.20950 of 2018

K.Malaiyandi

.. Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The Superintendent of Police,

¶11

Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

¶12

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ponnamaravathy, Pudukkottai District. ... Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the issuance of Writ of mandamus directing the respondents to accord police protection to the Deupty Secretary of Amma Makkal Munnetra Kazakam T.T.V.Dinakaran on 07.10.2018 for attending the Sri Nambi Natchiamman Festival as well as Virattu Manjuvirattu at Pidarampatti, Ponnamaravathy Taluk, Pudukkottai District based on petitioner's representation, dated 03.10.2018.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.K.G.Arunkumar

¶15

For Respondents : Mr.B.Bagawathi Government Advocate

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This Writ petition has been filed seeking for police protection. The petitioner has given a representation dated 03.10.2018 to the first and second respondents and have sought for police protection.

¶18

2.In view of the limited prayer sought for by the petitioner, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to consider the representation dated 03.10.2018 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶19

3.Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar(Records)

¶22

/True Copy/

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)

¶24

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

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

¶29

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ponnamaravathy, Pudukkottai District.

¶30

+1cc to Spl Government Pleader, SR No.89002 +1cc to Mr.K.G.ArunKumar, SR No.88993

¶31

W.P.(MD)No.20950 of 2018

¶32

NM/SKN/SAR 4/05.10.18/2P/5C

¶33

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

K.Malaiyandi v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Malaiyandi v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sivanaintha Perumal Vs the Inspector of Police

Ramar Ammal @ Ramalakshmi Vs the Inspector of Police

Manoj Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

R.Anburani W/O Royappan Vs the Superintendent of Police

Kanthasamy, Vs the Superintendent of Police

N. Senthilkumar Vs S. Veeraganesan