Madras High Court
Sundaram vs The Superintendent Of Police on 23 April, 2025
W.P(MD) NO.11604 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 23.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL
W.P(MD) No.11604 of 2025
Sundaram ... Petitioner
vs.
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Trichy District.
Trichy.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Manapparai Division,
Manapparai
Trichy District.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Valanadu Police Station,
Thuvarankurichi Circle,
Valanadu,
Trichy District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India
to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records
pertaining to the impugned order passed by the second respondent vide his
proceedings in Na.Ka.No.225/Thu.Ka/Ma.Vu.Ko/2025 dated 19.04.2025
and quash the same as illegal consequently, direct the respondents 2 and 3
_____________
Page No. 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/04/2025 11:01:20 am )
W.P(MD) NO.11604 of 2025
to permit the petitioner to conduct Adal Padal Cultural dance program on
26.04.2025 at Arulmigu Sree Bagavathi Amman temple festival at
Palakurichi Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy.
For petitioner :Mr.T.Vadivelan
For respondents :Mr.R.M.Anbunithi
Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side)
*****
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner to quash the impugned order passed by the second respondent vide his proceedings in Na.Ka.No. 225/Thu.Ka/Ma.Vu.Ko/2025 dated 19.04.2025 and consequently, direct the respondents 2 and 3 to permit the petitioner to conduct Adal Padal Cultural dance program on 26.04.2025 at Arulmigu Sree Bagavathi Amman temple festival at Palakurichi Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is one of the members in Vizhakuzhu of the Arulmigu Sree Bagavathi Amman temple at Palakurichi Village, Marungapuri Taluk, Trichy. The villagers decided to conduct Kumbabisekam for the abovesaid _____________ Page No. 2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/04/2025 11:01:20 am ) W.P(MD) NO.11604 of 2025 temple and also celebrate Mandagapadi festival for 48 days. While so, on the eve of 46th day of Mandagapadi, they decided to conduct Adal Padal cultural programme. Hence, they approached the second respondent for grant of permission through representation dated 19.04.2025, but the same was rejected on the same day by assigning the reason of law and order issue. The petitioner undertakes to conduct the Adal Padal programme without any law and order issue, and hence, the second respondent could not deny permission to conduct cultural programme of Adal Padal only for law and order issue. Therefore, the order passed by the second respondent is liable to be quashed.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) for the respondents would submit that the petitioner sent a representation dated 19.04.2025 for grant of permission to conduct Adal Padal programme on 26.04.2025 on the eve of 46 th day of Mandagapad for Arulmigu Sree Bagavathi Amman temple and the same was rejected on the ground of law and order issue. Therefore, the second respondent passed detailed order by assigning reasons.
4. This Court heard both sides and perused the records. _____________ Page No. 3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/04/2025 11:01:20 am ) W.P(MD) NO.11604 of 2025
5. The petitioner sent a representation to the third respondent for permission to conduct Adal Padal programme on 26.04.2025 and the same was rejected by the second respondent on 19.04.2025 by stating reasons that if the cultural programme is conducted, the neighbouring villagers also would take part in the programme and therefore, there may be chances of law and order issue. The abovesaid reason is not a ground to deny to grant permission for cultural programme of Adal Padal. The petitioner also undertakes to conduct Adal Padal programme without any law and order issue. The second respondent, without considering the fact that Adal Padal programme is one of the cultural programmes, rejected the permission. Therefore, the order passed by the second respondent is liable to be quashed.
6. In view of the same, the order passed by the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.225/Thu.Ka/Ma.Vu.Ko/2025 dated 19.04.2025 is set aside and this Court directs the second respondent to grant permission to conduct Adal Padal programme on 26.04.2025 by imposing appropriate conditions in accordance with law and to give adequate police protection and also to monitor the entire programme. The petitioner is also directed not to honour any particular community people and ensure that without any _____________ Page No. 4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/04/2025 11:01:20 am ) W.P(MD) NO.11604 of 2025 obscene acts, the Adal Padal programme has to be conducted.
7. With the abovesaid observations and directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
23.04.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
apd
Note:
Issue on 24.04.2025
To
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Trichy District.
Trichy.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Manapparai Division, Manapparai Trichy District.
3. The Inspector of Police, Valanadu Police Station, Thuvarankurichi Circle, Valanadu, Trichy District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. _____________ Page No. 5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/04/2025 11:01:20 am ) W.P(MD) NO.11604 of 2025 P.DHANABAL,J apd W.P.(MD) No.11604 of 2025 23.04.2025 _____________ Page No. 6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/04/2025 11:01:20 am )