Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
G. Sudhakaran - Petitioner
Versus
The Inspector of Police Paravakottai Police Station, Paravakottai, Thiruvarur District – Respondent
W.P.No.16160 of 2025 and W.M.P.No.18292 of 2025
Decided On : 30-04-2025
(A) Writ Petition - Permission to conduct cultural programme - The petitioner challenged the rejection of permission for Aadal Padal programme during temple festival, citing previous approvals and lack of law and order issues. The court emphasized the need for timely consideration of such requests and quashed the impugned order. (Paras 1, 8, 10)
(B) Public Order - The court directed the respondent to grant permission with conditions to ensure public order, including restrictions on content and timing of the programme. (Paras 8, 9)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought permission for a cultural programme during a temple festival, which had been conducted peacefully in the past. The respondent denied permission citing potential law and order issues.
Findings of Court:
The court found the rejection unsustainable and directed the respondent to grant permission with specific conditions.
Issues: The main issues included the validity of the respondent's rejection of permission and the necessity of timely police response to such requests.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that customary celebrations should be allowed unless there is a substantial law and order concern, and emphasized the importance of timely police action on requests.
Result: Writ Petition allowed.
ORDER :
This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner, challenging order passed by the respondent dated 23.04.2025, thereby rejecting permission to conduct the Aadal Padal programme to be held on 05.05.2025 during the night time at 6.00 pm., to 11.00 p.m., in the event of Melanatham Village Sree Muthu Mariyammal Temple festival at Mannarkudi Taluk, Thiruvarur District, and quash the impugned order along with the consequential prayer for granting permission and an adequate police protection to conduct the Aadal Padal programme on 05.05.2025.
2. The petitioner averred that he along with other villagers are belong to Melanatham village and in their village, there is a temple called Sree Muthu Mariyammal Temple. It is a rich heritage and ancient temple and for the past several years, they are celebrating temple festival. During the temple festival, a cultural programme like Aadal padal programme is being conducted for the past several years in a peaceful manner without any law and order problem. Likewise, in this year also, festival of Sree Muthu Mariyammal Temple is scheduled and there is a proposal to conduct Aadal padal programme on 05.05.2025 at about 6.00 pm., to 11.00 p.m. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent, seeking permission to conduct Aadal padal programme, on 23.04.2025. The respondent, without considering the above circumstances, mechanically rejected permission to conduct Aadal padal programme for the reason that if they conduct Aadal padal programme, there will be a law and order problem. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that this Court repeatedly directs the police officials to grant permission to conduct Aadal padal programme and other related programmes with certain conditions. Therefore, he prayed to quash the impugned order and prayed to grant permission to conduct Aadal padal programme on 05.05.2025.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondents submitted that if the petitioner is allowed to conduct Aadal padal programme, there will be a law and order problem. Therefore, this writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record.
6. It is relevant to rely the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court dated 10.07.2018 made in W.P.(MD)No.14491 of 2018, where, this Court has held as follows:
“3. ....... In M.Velmurugan V. The Superintendent of Police, on 24.01.2018. In passing orders in W.P.(MD) No.13440 of 2017, dated 20.07.2017, this Court had observed as follows:-
“3.We may at the very outset note that the celebrations pertain to Arulmighu Sankaranarayana Swamy Temple, Sankarankovil. It is a very ancient and renowed Temple. It is under the control of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. It is beyond dispute that celebrations in such Temples are customary in nature. It is not as if the writ petitioner is seeking to introduce some new practice. What is being traditionally held and conducted has to be necessarily followed. Therefore, we have no hesitation in allowing the writ petition as prayed for”
It is also relevant to note the notification dated 10.08.2017 in S.O.2555(E) by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, wherein, it has been stated as follows:
“3.In the principal rules, in rule 5, for sub-rule (3), the following shall be substituted namely:-
(3)Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule(2), the State Government may subject to such terms and conditions as are necessary to reduce noise pollution, permit use of loud speakers or public address systems and the like during night hours (between 10.00 p.m. to 12.00 midnight) on or during any cultural, religious or festive occasion of a limited duration not exceeding fifteen days in all during a calendar year and the concerned State Government or District Authority in respect of its jurisdic
The court affirmed the right to conduct traditional cultural programmes, emphasizing timely police consideration and the necessity of maintaining public order.
The court upheld the right to conduct customary cultural programmes, emphasizing timely police action and the need for substantial evidence to deny permission based on law and order concerns.
Cultural events with a history of peaceful conduct should not be denied by police without substantial justification, and timely consideration of requests is essential.
Cultural events should not be denied without substantial justification, and authorities must respond promptly to requests for permissions.
The court upheld the right to conduct customary cultural events, emphasizing timely police responses to requests for permissions to prevent unnecessary litigation.
Traditional cultural celebrations should not be denied without substantial evidence of potential disruption, and timely police responses to permission requests are essential.
Traditional cultural celebrations must be respected, and police must consider requests for such events reasonably and within a specified timeframe.
The court upheld the right to conduct traditional cultural programs, emphasizing timely police consideration and the importance of maintaining public order.
Traditional cultural programs should not be denied without substantial evidence of potential law and order issues, emphasizing the importance of cultural heritage.
The court affirmed the right to conduct traditional cultural events, emphasizing the need for police to grant permissions unless significant law and order concerns exist.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
