Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
D.Murugesan &
S.Nagamuthu JJ
K.Karunthamalai vs The District Collector
W.P. (MD)No.10711 of 2009 dtd. 28.10.2009
For Petr. : Mr.M.Ramadhas
For Respts. : Mr.R.Janakiramulu, Spl.G.P. ; Mr.P.Rajkumar
Ratios
a. Power to regulate the procession given to the authorities concerned have to be exercised reasonably.
b. Test to ascertain whether the restriction imposed by the authorities on the right to take out procession is reasonableness would be whether it is arbitrary or of an excessive nature so as to go beyond the requirement of the interest of general public and whether there exists a direct and proximate nexus or reasonable connection between the restrictions imposed and the purpose for which such restrictions are imposed.
c. Article 19 of the Constitution of India can be invoked to challenge the decision of the authorities regarding the right to take out procession, only when there is a permanent restriction directly infringing a fundamental right.
d. Authorities could regulate the route through which a procession could be taken out by the citizens.
e. While prescribing the route through which a procession could be taken by the citizens, the authorities should be reasonable.
Headnote:(A)Chennai City Police Act, 1888(3 of 1988)-Sec.41-Constitution of India-Art.19-Fundamental right-Procession-Restriction-Police-Power-Route-Petitioner had sought for permission to take out procession in a particular route on the occasion of the birth anniversary of a leader and when it was refused, he had challenged it by contending that denial of a particular route caused him and others much hardship, he had to take circuitous route to reach the venue and the respondent could not impose such condition as it was unreasonable-Respondent resisted the plea by contending that in the past, when people had used the route demanded, there was a law and order problem which resulted in registration of FIR and the cases were still pending and the denial of a particular route was not unreasonable-Held, a citizen could not insist the police to permit him to take procession in a particular route and unless the permitted route was much onerous, and unreasonable, the citizen could not question the same-Interest of the society to maintain order and peace should prevail over the claim of an individual regarding the exercise of fundamental right in a particular manner-Taking a different route than the one requested which was not so onerous would not amount to imposing unreasonable condition on the exercise of fundamental right-Writ petition was dismissed and the administration was directed to conduct peace meeting for the subsequent years well in advance.
(B)Chennai City Police Act, 1888(3 of 1988)-Sec.41-Constitution of India-Art.19-Fundamental right-Procession-Restriction-Police-Power-Route- Power to regulate the procession given to the authorities concerned have to be exercised reasonably-Test to ascertain whether the restriction imposed by the authorities on the right to take out procession is reasonableness would be whether it is arbitrary or of an excessive nature so as to go beyond the requirement of the interest of general public and whether there exists a direct and proximate nexus or reasonable connection between the restrictions imposed and the purpose for which such restrictions are imposed-Article 19 of the Constitution of India can be invoked to challenge the decision of the authorities regarding the right to take out procession, only when there is a permanent restriction directly infringing a fundamental right.
A careful reading of the above provisions of the Act would show that the power to regulate the procession given to the authorities concerned, though is not absolute but, has to be exercised reasonably. While exercising the said power, the authorities must keep in their mind as to the public order and for that matter the anticipated law and order problem that may occur enroute. The decision of the authority must be reasonable and the test of reasonableness is that whether it is arbitrary or of an excessive nature so as to go beyond the requirement of the interest of general public and whether there exists a direct and proximate nexus or reasonable connection between the restrictions imposed and the purpose for which such restrictions are imposed. Article 19 of the Constitution of India can be invoked only when there is a permanent restriction directly infringing a fundamental right. However, the said Article cannot be made applicable in the event of prohibition is made for a procession on a particular route and when such prohibition is only to regulate the procession in the interest of general public and to maintain public order. A decision prohibiting such procession, which is otherwise in the form of regulation, cannot be considered to be violation of Article 19 of the Constitution of India. Para 12
(C)Chennai City Police Act, 1888(3 of 1988)-Sec.41-Constitution of India-Art.19-Fundamental right-Procession-Restriction-Police-Power-Route-Authorities could regulate the route through which a procession could be taken out by the citizens-While prescribing the route through which a procession could be taken by the citizens, the authorities should be reasonable.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that even a deviation of a route would offend the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, in our opinion, is on misconception, as identifying the route for procession is mere regulation which ought to be regulated by the authorities, of course, reasonably and not arbitrarily. The right guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India cannot be claimed as an absolute right and such right is subject to reasonable restriction in the form of regulations. Para 13
Act Referred
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : Art.19
2.Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar's 102nd Jayanthi is to be held on 30th October, 2009 at his birth village, namely Pasumpon. Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar was an icon in the political life in Southern Tamil Nadu, later on recognised as such in the national stream. He had adopted a simple and strict life style and interacted with all caste people in local communities. Pillars of Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar's political thought were among spiritualism and nationalism. Muthuramalinga Thevar's Jayanthi to be held on 30.10.2009 has given cause for the petitioner to approach this Court for a direction to the respondents to permit the villagers belonging to Mandalamanickam village to worship Muthuramalinga Thevar statue in the said village, while they come back from Usilampatti to Pasumpon via. Madurai, Kariapatti, Thiruchuli, Muthuramalingapuramputhur, Mandalamanickam, Kamuthi, Kottai Medu, before they reach Pasumpon Village.
3.According to the petitioner, he is a freedom fighter and he and the villagers had been conducting Thevar Jayanthi and Guru Pooja function every year on 30th October for the last 47 years. The practice hitherto adopted was that the villagers, presently numbering 60, will leave Mandalamanickam village to Usilampatti, through Muthuramalingapuramputhur, on 28th October, they take Torch from Usilampatti and come back to their village on 29th October only through Muthuramalingapuramputhur and after having darshan at Muneeswaran Temple and Muthuramalinga Thevar Statue in their village, they leave to Pasmpon Village. This year, the respondents are not allowing the villagers to go to Usilampatti via.Muthuramalingapuramputhur and again from Usilampatti to their village through Muthuramalingapuramputhur on the ground of anticipated law and order problem. There is no reason exist for such an apprehension and if the route is diverted, the procession had to further cover 60 kilometres more, resulting in hardship.
4.According to the learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.M.Ramadhas, inasmuch as the right to take out a procession is considered to be a fundamental right under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, such a right cannot be restricted without even there being any opportunity given to the petitioner. The practice hitherto adopted for over a period of 47 years cannot, all of a sudden, be curtailed. Hence learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the procession shall be permitted to pass through Muthuramalingapuramputhur this year as well and the petitioner is, in fact, prepared to give an undertaking on behalf of himself and the villagers in whole for ensuring peace during the procession in order to maintain law and order.
5.In response to the notice, the District Collector, Ramanathapuram District, has filed a counter affidavit. It is averred therein that as the processions are to be taken from various Districts like Madurai, Theni, Pudukkottai, Sivagangai, Tiruneveli, Tuticorin and Virudhunagar, a coordination meeting, consisting of the District Collectors, Superintendents of Police, Regional Transport Officers of the above seven Districts and all the District Level Officers of Ramanathapuram District, was held on 08.10.2009. In the said meeting, it was decided to allow Thevar's Jayanthi Rally and Mulaippari till 29.10.2009. During the meeting, various strategies for ensuring peaceful conduct of Thevar Jayanthi Celebrations were discussed and it was also unanimously decided that all processions, including Jothi Rally and carrying of Mulaippari pots, would be allowed till 29.10.2009, considering the security aspect and free flow of tra
