In a writ petition under Article 226 seeking removal of unauthorized loud speakers at a temple, the court dismissed the petition after respondents confirmed the speakers were removed on 27.04.2021 and no menace persisted.
None granted as the petition was closed due to removal of the subject matter.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.06.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
W.P. No.8435 of 2021
C.Selvam ... Petitioner
Versus
1.The District Collector,
Tirupattur,
Tirupattur District.
2.The Chief Educational Officer,
Tirupattur,
Tirupattur District.
3.The District Educational Officer,
Tirupattur,
Tirupattur District.
4.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Tirupattur,
Tirupattur District.
5.The Inspector of Police,
Tirupattur Taluk Police Station,
Tirupattur & District.
6.L.Subramani ...Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 Constitution of India, to issue Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1, 4 and 5 to take appropriate action against the sixth respondent for the continuous usage of the banned horn types loud speakers in Murugal Koil at P.Muthampatti Village and for creating sound menace and the respondents 4 & 5 to impose total ban on the use of the sound menace/devices or to remove the loud speakers permanently.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Desinghu For Respondents : Mr.Damodharan (for R1 to R5) Government Advocate (Crl.side)
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking a direction to remove the unauthorized installation of the loud speakers on the Temple.
2.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondents one to five would submit that on 27.04.2021 itself, the unauthorized loud speakers installed in the said Temple were removed and nothing survives for further adjudication.
3.In view of the same, the learned counsel for the petitioner has also confirmed the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondents one to five that now, there is no such sound menace.
4.Recording the submissions of both counsel, the present
Writ Petition is closed. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
klt
To
1.The District Collector,
Tirupattur, Tirupattur District.
2.The Chief Educational Officer,
Tirupattur, Tirupattur District.
3.The District Educational Officer,
Tirupattur, Tirupattur District.
4.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Tirupattur, Tirupattur District.
5.The Inspector of Police,
Tirupattur Taluk Police Station,
Tirupattur & District.
6.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
W.P.No.8435 of 2021
KV(CO) SB(13/07/2021)
C. Selvam
The District Collector, Tirupattur
The Chief Educational Officer, Tirupattur
The District Educational Officer, Tirupattur
The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tirupattur
The Inspector of Police, Tirupattur Taluk Police Station
M. Nirmal Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
