R.K. Agrawal, A.C.J. & N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.

1. These writ appeals are heard in the special sitting. The appeals are preferred by the State Government challenging the order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.Nos.10457 and 10458 of 2013 dated 12.4.2013 respectively giving permission to hold procession at 3.00 p.m. on 14.4.2013 in the route Rajarathinam Stadium, Egmore, Chennai to Langs Garden Road, Chennai as requested by the writ petitioner in W.P.No.10457 of 2013, and to regulate and control the procession by the Police; and to conduct public meting as requested by the writ petitioner in W.P.No.10458 of 2013 at Mangollai, Mylapore, Chennai-4 from 6.00 to 10.00 p.m. on 14.4.2013 on the occasion of celebration of Dr.B.R.Ambedkar's birth anniversary and to give away awards to certain persons.

2. The learned Advocate General appearing for the appellants based on the contentions raised in the counter affidavit filed in the writ petitions and grounds raised in the writ appeals argued that pamphlets published by the Organisers of the procession and pubic meeting causes great concern for the Police authorities in maintaining peace and tranquility and public order and the conduct of political party, which is organising the same, when such procession and meetings were conducted earlier, there were traffic hazards and law and order problem arose, and bearing the said issues in mind the request to conduct procession was considered and then a show cause notice was issued to the organiser in relation to the procession. The respondents in these writ appeals who filed writ petitions before the learned single Judge submitted explanation to the show cause notice on 10.4.2013 and without waiting for the orders to be passed by the third appellant herein, the petitioners have rushed to this Court by filing the above writ petitions on 11.4.2013 and prayed for issuing a writ of mandamus to hold procession and conduct public meeting. The learned Advocate General relied on the decisions reported in (2004) 4 SCC 684 (State of Karnataka v. Dr.Praveen Bhai Togadia); (2012) 5 SCC 1 (Ramlila Maidan Incident, In Re); Division Bench judgment of this Court reported in 2004 (5) CTC 554 (Rama Muthuramalingam V. DSP, Mannargudi) and two other decisions of learned single Judge of this Court and contended that the authorities have to decide the grant of permission to hold procession and for conducting public meeting based on the ground realities and this Court ought not to have entertained the writ petitions and issued directions and the Law Enforcing authorities are the best judges to assess the prevailing situation in the area, where the permission is sought to conduct procession/public meeting. The learned Advocate General further reiterated that the pamphlets published by the organisers causes worry and if the permission sought for are granted, it may cause disturbance in caste clashes as certain areas in the State are still under the grip of caste tension.

3. Mr.S.Prabakaran, learned counsel appearing for the respondents in the writ appeals on the other hand submitted that the political party "Viduthalai Siruthaigal Katchi" (VCK) is proposing to celebrate the birth anniversary of Dr.B.R.Ambedkar on 14.42013 and the award giving function is being organised by the said party from the year 2007 and for conducting procession from Rajarathinam Stadium to Langs Garden Road, permission was sought as early as on 26.3.2013 and for conducting public meeting at Mangollai, Mylapore permission was sought for on 8.4.2013. The third respondent called the organisers of the procession and suggested to change the timings from 10.00 a.m to 3.00 p.m. and as per the said request only the time to commence the procession was fixed at 3.00 p.m. Subsequently the 3rd respondent went back from the assurance and issued show cause notice and in spite of giving explanation to the show cause notice, no order was passed. As the time to conduct procession and meeting