IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J
V.Ramalingam – Appellant
Versus
The Tahsildar Dharmapuri Taluk – Respondent
Writ Petition
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks mandamus for public meeting permission under police act s.30 (Para 2) |
| 2. petitioner agrees to fresh post-election application (Para 3) |
| 3. writ disposed; fresh application to be considered post-elections if no law/order issues (Para 4) |
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 ofConstitution of Indiato issue any Writ, order or direction, particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st Respondent to grant permission to conduct a public meeting on 12-04-2026, at about 5.00 p.m. at scheduled open space near BSNL Office, Dharmapuri or on any other date, under section 30 of thePolice Act, 1861, along with permitted sound amplifiers, by considering the application dated 19- 03-2026.
For Petitioner(s): Mr. P.G.Thiyagu For Respondent(s): Mr. LEONARD ARUL JOSEPH SELVAM ADDITIONAL PP ASSISTED BY Mr. HARSHANA. T FOR R2
ORDER
The petitioner had filed this Writ Petition seeking a direction to the first respondent to grant permission to conduct a public meeting on 12-04-2026, at about 5.00 p.m. at scheduled open space near BSNL Office, Dharmapuri or on any other date, under section 30 of thePolice Act, 1861, along with permitted sound amplifiers, by considering the application of the petitioner dated 19-03-2026.
2. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had given an application dated 19.03.2026 to the first respondent seeking permission to conduct public meeting on 12.04.2026 at about 5 p.m. to condemn improper allocation of newly constructed shops in Dharmapuri Bus Terminus without affording sufficient opportunities to the small and marginal vendors of Dharmapuri Town. Since no action has been taken on the application of the petitioner, the present Writ Petition has been filed.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that subsequently, the petitioner had given a letter stating that after the general election, the petitioner will give a fresh application seeking permission for conducting above said meeting. It is his further contention that, if a fresh application is given by the petitioner after the general elections, the same will be considered by the respondents as per law.
4. In view of the above submissions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to give a fresh representation to the respondent after the general elections seeking permission and the respondents shall consider the same and to grant permission, if there is no law and order issue.
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.