The court emphasized that the application of Section 41-A of the Chennai City Police Act, 1888 required a careful consideration of whether there was a likelihood of disturbance to public peace, public safety, or public order, and that the conditions imposed must be justified by such concerns.

M.M. Sundresh, J.

1. As the issues involved in all these writ petitions are one and the same, they have been taken up and disposed of by a common order.

2. In so far as W.P. No. 777 of 2016 is concerned, the petitioner organisation has been having a dress code apparently from the year 1924 onwards with the white shirt and khaki trouser (half pant). Permissions have been sought for by the petitioner for the purpose of commemorating the 100th year Annual day of Sri. Ramanujar, 153rd Annual day of Swami Vivekanandar, 125th Annual day of Dr.Ambedkar. In the other writ petition, namely, W.P. No. 778 of 2016, an application has been made for the purpose of celebrating Mahara Sankaranthi by way of procession from Parthasarathi Temple to Padmanabhapuram. Though permissions have been granted by the respondents concerned, certain conditions have been imposed and the petitioners are aggrieved over two of such conditions. The conditions sought to be impugned are that the members of Rashtreeya Swayam Sevak Sangh, who are represented by the petitioners herein, shall not wear their traditional uniform during procession and they shall not carry sticks apart from taking musical instruments as the same would lead disturbance to public peace. Challenging these two conditions, the present writ petitions have been filed.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the issue involved is no longer res integra. Considering the very same issue, this Court in W.P. No. 28682 of 2014 has held that the petitioners are entitled for the relief sought for. While acknowledging the entitlement of the petitioner to wear khaki half trouser and white shirt, this Court has held in the said writ petition in the following manner:

"20. Arguments were advanced on both sides on the question as to whether the Khaki half-trouser and the white shirt worn by the volunteers of the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh, resemble the uniform of the armed forces of the Union or the police force. Apart from the fact that no member of the police force today wear half-trousers, the question is of no relevance to the cases on hand, since Section 41-A does not deal with the holding of processions but it deals only with drill, training or assembly. It is claimed that the uniform that the volunteers wear, was designed way back in 1920. Therefore, the respondents appear to have raised a bogey, in the form of such an objection and they have taken recourse to a wrong provision of law. Hence, on a pure and simple question of law, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside."

4. Though the writ appeal has been filed against the said order, there is no interim order, which in fact, has been rejected. Therefore, the respondents are bound by the said order.

5. It is further submitted on behalf the petitioners that Section 41-A of Chennai City Police Act, 1888 can at best be regulatory and not mandatory. The entire Section has to be read as a whole. It cannot be made applicable to the case of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh represented by the petitioners, especially when the uniform, which is said to be resembling, is to be used by the trainees, that too, during drills. Therefore, the said condition cannot be sustained.

6. Coming to the other condition imposed, which is of two parts, namely, carrying of sticks and usage of musical instruments is concerned, it is submitted that the petitioners are not carrying any sticks. However, the sticks used for musical instruments are to be construed as part and parcel of the same and therefore, they cannot be termed as arms. In other words, they cannot be termed on par Insofar as the musical with clubs and sticks used for violence. instruments are concerned, it is submitted that it is beyond reasoning and logic that they would not cause any law and order problem. Therefore, it is submitted that writ petitions will have to be allowed by setting aside the aforesaid conditions.

7. The learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of responden