SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Mad) 1219

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K. MURALI SHANKAR, J.
Senthilkumar – Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai & Another – Respondents
W.P(MD)No. 4463 of 2023
Decided On : 03-03-2023

Important Points

The court emphasized the importance of following the guidelines issued by the Director General of Police for consideration of applications seeking permission for conducting cultural programmes.

Subject

Administrative Law - Permission for Cultural Programme

Act Referred

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : Art.226

Headnote

Writ Petition - Permission for Cultural Programme - The court directed the police to consider the representation of the writ petitioner for conducting a cultural programme based on the circular and guidelines issued by the Director General of Police.

Fact of the Case:

The writ petitioner sought permission and police protection to conduct a dance programme in pursuant to a religious event. The police had not considered the petitioner's representation, leading to the filing of the writ petition.

Finding of the Court:

The court directed the police to consider the representation of the writ petitioner based on the circular and guidelines issued by the Director General of Police.

Issues: Permission for conducting a cultural programme, failure of the police to consider the petitioner's representation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the circular memorandum issued by the Director General of Police, which provided guidelines for consideration of applications seeking permission for conducting cultural programmes.

Final Decision: The writ petition stands disposed of with the direction for the police to consider the representation of the writ petitioner and pass suitable orders based on the circular.

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:D. Rameshkumar, advocate. For the Respondents: E. Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to grant permission and to provide police protection to conduct the “Adalum Padalum” dance programme on 03.03.2023 in pursuant to teh “Maha Kumbahishekam” at “Arulmigu Kosuvayee Amman and Pattavan Thirukovil, situated at Poongudi, Vellanur, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukkottai District, by considering the petitioner''s representation, dated 28.02.2023.)

1. The writ petitioner filed this Writ Petition seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to grant permission and to provide police protection to conduct the “Adalum Padalum” dance programme on 03.03.2023 in pursuant to the “Maha Kumbahishekam” at “Arulmigu Kosuvayee Amman and Pattavan Thirukovil, situated at Poongudi, Vellanur, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukkottai District, by considering the petitioner''s representation, dated 28.02.2023.

2. Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, 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 “Maha Kumbahishekam” at “Arulmigu Kosuvayee Amman and Pattavan Thirukovil, situated at Poongudi, Vellanur, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukkottai District, is going to be held on 03.02.2023. Subsequent to the same, in order to conduct Adalum Padalum dance programme on 03.03.2023, they sought permission of the police by giving a representation dated 28.02.2023. 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 would further submit that they may be permitted to conduct the programme on 03.03.2023, from 07.00 p.m. to 10.00 p.m.

5. At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner would submit that they are ready to conduct the programme as stated by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

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

7. 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 incorporating the date and time of the cultural programme before the second respondent police and on such filing, the second respondent police is hereby directed to consider the representation of the writ petitioner, dated 28.02.2023 and pass suitable orders based on the above said circular.

8. With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top