IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T. RAJA, J.
P. Ayyakannu – Petitioner
Vs.
The Government of Tamil Nadu – Respondents
W.P.No.8652 of 2018
Decided On : 28-04-2018
Mandamus - Right to Assemble - Chennai City Police Act, 1888 - Article 19(1)(b) - Marina Beach - Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Public Order - Peaceful Assembly - Public Meeting
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a mandamus directing the City Police Commissioner to grant permission for a 90-day peaceful fasting struggle at Marina Beach in Chennai. The police had refused permission citing efforts to preserve the beaches and offered alternative locations.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the right to assemble peacefully without arms and the right to move anywhere in the territory of India cannot be unreasonably restricted. It held that the power to regulate does not include the power to prohibit and directed the respondents to grant permission for a one-day peaceful fast meeting at Marina Beach.
Issues: The main issue was whether the police's refusal to grant permission for a peaceful fasting struggle at Marina Beach was arbitrary and violated the petitioner's fundamental right to assemble peacefully without arms.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Constitution Bench's ruling in Himat Lal K.Shah's case, which held that the State cannot impose unreasonable restrictions on the right to assemble peacefully without arms. It also emphasized that the power to regulate does not include the power to prohibit.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to grant permission for a one-day peaceful fast meeting at Marina Beach.
Mr. P. Ayyakannu, claiming to be the State President of National South Indian River Interlinking Agriculturist Sangam, has filed the present writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the City Police Commissioner, Chennai City, the third respondent herein to grant permission, as per the petitioner's representation dated 9.4.2018, to conduct fasting struggle for 90 days from 9.4.2018 at Marina Beach in Chennai.
2. Mr. S. Ayyathurai, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in public life from his student days and has been working for the past 25 years for the welfare of the agriculturists in Tamil Nadu by conducting various procession, meeting to draw the attention of the State Government and the Central Government to solve the problems of the agriculturists. Since water is the main basic need for the agriculturists to cultivate the crops in their lands, the petitioner's main motive is for interlinking of all the rivers in India to promote the availability of water for agricultural operations. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner has been visiting every panchayat union in the villages to organize the agriculturists to conduct proper demonstration, procession, fasting to draw the attention of the State and the Central Governments to implement the demand for the interlinking of rivers. As there is no sufficient water in the rivers, lakes, ponds, they have organised farmers awareness march from Kanyakumari to Chennai for 100 days from 1.3.2018 and they have completed the awareness march in nearly ten districts and the said awareness march is still continuing in the other districts. In this background, the petitioner deems fit to organise a fast to make the people at large aware of constituting the Cauvery Water Management Board for getting proper share of water from the river Cauvery. Since the Cauvery Water Management Board has not been constituted for the supply of due share of water to the agriculturists in Tamil Nadu, various political parties, associations and farmers associations including the petitioner are conducting various awareness programmes. In this regard, as there is no vast space available in Chennai city for conducting a peaceful fast by the petitioner association, they have decided to conduct a fast meeting in Marina beach at Chennai from 9.4.2018 for 90 days and submitted a petition on 2.4.2018 through e-mail to the third respondent seeking permission for conducting a peaceful fast without causing any hindrance to the public. Whereas the petitioner has not received any reply from the third respondent for conducting the fast struggle at Marina beach. As the act of the third respondent in not answering the petitioner's request for a long time is arbitrary and unreasonable, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court seeking a mandamus to the third respondent to grant permission on the basis of the representation dated 2.4.2018 to conduct the fast at the said place.
3. After issuance of notice, the third respondent has filed a counter affidavit. The learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents contended that since no permission was granted to any organisation of any nature whatsoever to conduct the demonstration, fast, protest, rally, etc., in the sands of Marina for a longer duration since 2003, the State Government decided not to grant permission to conduct the demonstration, public meeting, rally, fast, etc., for political parties as well as other organisations in view of the efforts taken to preserve the beaches. In order to achieve the same, the Chennai Corporation was also instructed to locate the alternative places for such purpose. In the meanwhile, one Mr. P.N. Srinivasan, in the year 2004, applied for permission to celebrate the 62nd anniversary of Quit India Movement at Marina beach. But the permission was not granted. On denial of such permission, he filed Writ Petition No.22402 of 2004 before this Court to quash
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.