The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of the circular memorandum issued by the Director General of Police, which provided guidelines for considering applications seeking permission for conducting cultural programs.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the second respondent to give adequate police protection for the Puravi Eduppu festival on 05.04.2023 and 06.04.2023 for the Arulmigu Muthalamman Temple, at Thethampatti Village, Naththam Taluk, Dindigul District by considering the petitioner''s representation dated 24.03.2023.)

1. This writ petitioner filed this Writ Petition seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the second respondent to give adequate police protection for the Puravi Eduppu festival on 05.04.2023 and 06.04.2023 for the Arulmigu Muthalamman Temple, at Thethampatti Village, Naththam Taluk, Dindigul District by considering the petitioner''s representation dated 24.03.2023.

2. Mr.B.Nambiselvan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor takes notice for the respondents. By consent, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner submitted that festival for the temple, by name, “Arulmigu Muthalamman Temple” at Thethampatti Village, Naththam Taluk, Dindigul District, is going to be held on 05.04.2023 and 06.04.2023. Subsequent to the same, in order to conduct a cultural programme on 05.04.2023 and 06.04.2023, they sought permission of the police by giving a representation dated 24.03.2023. But, the second respondent has not considered the said representation. Since no order was passed, the writ petitioner has come before this Court for the above said relief.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents would submit that the second respondent has received the representation of the writ petitioner and the same is pending for consideration. He further submitted that there existed some rivalry between the two groups.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the compromise reached between the two groups and they are ready to file an undertaking affidavit, to that effect before the second respondent police.

6. At this juncture, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police submitted that after filling the undertaking the affidavit, the concerned authority may be considered the petitioner''s representation

7. I have considered the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

8. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu, Chennai had issued a circular memorandum in Rc. 007301/Genl.I (1)/2019, dated 09.04.2019, along with instructions to the Inspectors of Police throughout Tamil Nadu for consideration of applications seeking permission for conducting cultural programme. Therefore, in view of the detailed circular and guidelines issued by the Director General of Police, the writ petitioner is directed to file an undertaking affidavit as stated by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner before the second respondent police and on such filling, the second respondent is hereby directed to consider the representation of the writ petitioner, dated 24.03.2023 and pass suitable orders based on the above said circular. The petitioner is directed to file an

With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.