Courts can intervene to quash administrative orders denying event permissions if they violate individual rights and can direct police protection.

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.05.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Ananth ...Petitioner vs.

1. The Election Officer/Returning Officer, Ilayankudi Constitution Assembly, Sivagangai District.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District.

3. The Inspector of Police, Ilayankudi Police Station, Sivagangai District.

4. The Thasildar, Ilaynakudi Taluk Office, Sivagangai District. ...Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings of the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka.No. 03/Kaa.Aaa/Siva.U.Ko./Siva/2026, dated 02.05.2026 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to grant permission to the petitioner to conduct Annathanam and Valli Thirumanam Drama and other functions at Singara Kalaiyarangam, A.Kachathanallur, Ilayankudi, Sivagangai District, with sound, lighting arrangements and with adequate police protection, subject to such reasonable conditions.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Muthu Kamatchi For Respondents : Mr.A.S.Abul Kalaam Azad, Government Advocate (crl. side)

for R2 and R3 Mr.B.Ramanathan, Additional Government Pleader for R1 and R4

ORDER

The present Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the impugned proceedings of the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka.No.03/Kaa.Aaa/Siva.U.Ko./Siva/2026, dated 02.05.2026 and to direct the respondents to grant permission to the petitioner to conduct Annathanam and Valli Thirumanam Drama at Singara Kalaiyarangam, A.Kachathanallur, Ilayankudi, Sivagangai District, with sound, lighting arrangements and with adequate police protection.

2. Mr.A.S.Abul Kalaam Azad, learned Government Advocate (Crl.

Side) takes notice for R2 and R3 and Mr.B.Ramanathan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for R1 and R4.

3. By consent on either sides, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

4. The third respondent, vide impugned order denied permission to the petitioner for conducing Annathanam and Valli Thirumanam Drama on the ground that, in the Peace Committee Meeting among the villagers, it was decided that festival or sports competitions should not be conducted by a separate individual.

5. After verifying with the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court found that the petitioner is conducting the entire festival by contributing his own money. It was also brought to the knowledge of this Court that the petitioner's father was an Ex-President and due to the same, there was a dispute, which continues to the Annathanam and Valli Thirumanam Drama proposed to be conducted by the petitioner.

6. In such circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that if the rival groups are also allowed to participate in the Annathanam and Valli Thirumanam Drama, the issue could be sorted out. Hence, the petitioner is directed to submit an undertaking before the third respondent Police that he will not discriminate or restrain anyone from participating in Annathanam and Valli Thirumanam Drama to be conducted by his group. The petitioner is directed to allow everyone, including the rival groups to contribute, if they wish. The petitioner is also instructed not to pressurize anyone to bear the expenses. It is upto the villagers to either contribute or to not contribute.

7. In light of the above, the impugned order of the third respondent dated 02.05.2026 is quashed and the third respondent is directed to provide police protection and maintain law and order during the