Disposed

Palaniyammal v. the District Collector

Madras HC3 Dec 2024WP(MD)/8990/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Senior citizen sought a mandamus directing police protection for her life and property against her son-in-law. On a police report stating no present threat existed, the Court disposed of the writ petition directing the police to act on any future complaint.

What did the court decide?

Direction that the third respondent Inspector shall forthwith provide protection if the petitioner lodges a future complaint of threats; no order as to costs.

Palaniyammal Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.8990 of 2017

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 03.12.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU

¶6

W.P(MD)No.8990 of 2017 and

¶7

W.M.P(MD)No.6863 of 2017

Palaniyammal

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

¶12

2.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.

¶13

3.The Inspector of Police, Paralatchi Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

¶14

4.Chokkalingam ... Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to protect the petitioner and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to ensure the life and her property are protected and she is able to live with security and dignity as per Section 20 of Tamilnadu Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2009.

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

1/5

¶18

W.P(MD)No.8990 of 2017

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatesan For Respondents : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar Additional Government Pleader for R.1 Ms.M.Aasha Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for R.2 & R.3

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Heard Mr.R.Venkatesan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader for the 1^st respondent and Ms.M.Aasha, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), for the respondents 2 and 3.

¶22

This Writ Petition has been filed praying for a Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to protect the petitioner and to consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to ensure the life and her property are protected and she is able to live with security and dignity as per Section 20 of Tamilnadu Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2009.

¶23

When the matter was taken up for hearing, a report was filed by

¶24

the Sub-Inspector of Police attached to the third respondent's Police Station, accompanied by the petitioner's statement. Based upon the said

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

2/5

¶27

W.P(MD)No.8990 of 2017

¶28

statement, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3 would submit that at present even according to the petitioner there is no

¶29

threat to her life and property. Further, the report claims that the petitioner has sold the joint property belonging to the her husband and the father of the fourth respondent to a third party.

¶30

Be that as it may, it is the bounden duty of the Police to provide protection to citizens from any excesses or harm inflicted by others. Even though the petitioner has stated that at present there is no threat to her life or property, if in the future she lodges a complaint alleging excesses or threats from the fourth respondent or any other person, the third respondent shall forthwith afford necessary protection to the petitioner.

¶31

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no

¶32

order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶33

03.12.2024

¶34

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Nsr

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

3/5

¶37

W.P(MD)No.8990 of 2017

¶38

To:

¶39

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.

¶40

2.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.

¶41

3.The Inspector of Police, Paralatchi Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶43

4/5

¶44

W.P(MD)No.8990 of 2017

¶45

K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

¶46

Nsr

¶47

W.P(MD)No.8990 of 2017

¶48

03.12.2024

¶49

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶50

5/5

Palaniyammal v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Palaniyammal v. the District Collector

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

Subramanian Vs The Managing Director

L Gopalakrishnan Vs The Income Tax Officer

K. Ponraman President Vs the Joint Registrar of

P. Seran, Vs the Branch Manager

Ammaiyakkal Vs the State Represented by

M.Anbalagan, S/O.Mariappan, Vs the District Revenue Officer