Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K.Ilanthiraiyan, J.
Radhakrishnan - Petitioner
Versus
The Inspector of Police, Muthandikuppam Police Station - Respondent
W.P.No.10341 of 2025
Decided On : 21-03-2025
(A) Writ Petition - Challenging rejection of permission to conduct cultural event - The petitioner, a Dharmakartha, sought permission for Aadal Padal programme during temple festival, previously held peacefully. The respondent denied permission citing potential law and order issues. (Paras 1-2)
(B) Legal Principles - The court emphasized the importance of customary practices in religious celebrations and prior directives for police to grant permissions unless substantial issues arise. (Paras 3-6)
(C) Findings of Court - The court quashed the respondent's order, directing them to grant permission for the event with conditions to ensure public order. (Paras 8-10)
(D) Issues - The primary issue was whether the denial of permission was justified based on potential law and order problems. (Paras 2-4) (E) Ratio Decidendi - The court held that traditional practices should be respected and that police must act reasonably in granting permissions, reiterating prior judgments that support cultural events. (Paras 6-7) (F) Result - Writ petition allowed.
ORDER :
G.K.Ilanthiraiyan, J.
This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the proceedings of the respondent dated 17.03.2025 thereby rejecting permission to conduct the Aadal Padal programme to be held on 23.03.2025 between 6.00 pm and 11.00 pm on the eve of Kumbabishekam Thiruvizha of Sri Periyandavar Temple situated at North Street, Setuthankuppam and post, Panrudi Taluk, Cuddalore District along with the consequential prayer for granting permission and an adequate police protection to conduct the Aadal Padal programme on 23.03.2025.
2. The petitioner has averred that he is one of the Dharmakarthas of the Sri Periyandavar Temple situated at North Street, Setuthankuppam and post, Panrudi Taluk, Cuddalore District. The temple is an ancient and culturally significant place of worship, possessing a rich heritage. For the past 10 years, the residents of the village have been celebrating the Kodai Festival. During the temple festival, a cultural event known as the "Aadal Padal" programme has been conducted for the past 10 years in a peaceful manner, without any law and order issues. In the current year, the Sri Periyandavar Temple Festival is scheduled to be held over two days, with the petitioner proposing to conduct the Aadal Padal programme on 23.03.2025, from 6.00 pm to 11.00 pm. Consequently, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent seeking permission to conduct the Aadal Padal programme on the said date. However, the respondent, without properly considering the aforementioned circumstances, rejected the petitioner’s request for permission. The rejection was made on the ground that the Aadal Padal programme, if conducted, could potentially lead to a law and order problem. Therefore, the present writ petition has been filed challenging the respondent's decision.
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 23.03.2025.
4. The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondent 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
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.
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 traditional cultural programs, emphasizing timely police consideration and the importance 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.
Traditional cultural celebrations should not be denied without substantial evidence of potential disruption, and timely police responses to permission requests are essential.
The court emphasized the necessity for timely consideration of requests for cultural events and upheld the right to conduct such events with conditions to maintain public order.
Traditional cultural celebrations must be respected, and police must consider requests for such events reasonably and within a specified timeframe.
The court affirmed the right to conduct traditional cultural programmes, emphasizing timely police consideration and the necessity of maintaining public order.
Traditional cultural events should be permitted unless substantial law and order concerns are evidenced, emphasizing timely police consideration of requests for protection.
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
