Dismissed

A.Rjalingam S/O Arumugam v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC11 Feb 2021WP(MD)/13868/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus for permission to conduct a temple festival on 06.08.2017, Justice G. Ilangovan dismissed the matter as infructuous after the respondents submitted that the requested date had passed, rendering the prayer no longer operative.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to admit petition was dispensed with due to non-appearance of petitioner; petition dismissed as infructuous.

A.Rjalingam S/O Arumugam Vs the Superintendent of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.13868 of 2017

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 11.02.2021

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.13868 of 2017

¶7

A.Rajalingam .. Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Superintendent of Police, Karur District.

¶10

2.The Inspector of Police, Aravakurichi Police Station, Karur District.

¶11

3.N.Palanivel

¶12

4.R.Arumugam .. Respondents

¶13

(Cause title amended vide Court order dated 27.07.2017 in W.M.P. (MD).No.11014 of 2017)

¶14

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to grant permission to conduct the temple festival on 06.08.2017 at Arulmigu Pudavaisamy Thirukovil situated in Karuppapillai Pudur, Kottapatti Post, Aravakurichi Taluk, Karur District and to provide adequate police protection based on petitioner's representation dated 20.07.2017.

¶15

For Petitioner : No Appearance For Respondents : Mr.M.Ganesan, for R1 & R2 Government Advocate (Crl. Side) Mr.V.Perumal for R3 & 4

¶16

ORDER

¶17

(This writ petition is heard through video conference)

¶18

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner neither connected through the Virtual Court proceedings nor appear in person for physical hearing. The learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4 is present before this Court in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶19

1/2

¶20

W.P.(MD).No.13868 of 2017

¶21

person and submitted that the prayer sought for in this writ petition has become infructuous as it is related to grant of permission for the temple festival to be conducted on 06.08.2017. Hence, nothing survives in this matter for further adjudication.

¶22

2.Recording the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

¶23

// True Copy //

¶24

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶25

¶26

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶27

¶28

1.The Superintendent of Police, Karur District.

¶29

2.The Inspector of Police, Aravakurichi Police Station, Karur District.

¶30

W.P.(MD).No.13868 of 2017 11.02.2021

¶31

KM (26.02.2021) 2P 3C

¶32

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

¶33

2/2

A.Rjalingam S/O Arumugam v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Rjalingam S/O Arumugam 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

A.Raghunathan, Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

Chinna Nadar Vs The Inspector of Police

Muralikumar@Murali Vs The Inspector of Police

Vikki@Vignesh Vs The Deputy Superintendent of Police

S.Muniyandi Vs The Commissioner of Police

M.Ravi Vs the Superintendent of Police