Madras High Court
The Royal Club Of Pollachi vs The Superintendent Of Police on 6 December, 2010
Author: M.Jaichandren
Bench: M.Jaichandren
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 6.12.2010
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN
Writ Petition No.26772 of 2010
1 THE ROYAL CLUB OF POLLACHI
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT
V.P. NATCHIMUTHU
SF.NO.435/1A THIRUPUR ROAD
THERKUPALAYAM PIRIVU. NARANAPURAM
PALLADAM, THIRUPUR DISTRICT. [ PETITIONER ]
Vs
1 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
THIRUPPUR DISTRICT, THIRUPPUR
2 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF
POLICE, PALLADAM, THIRUPPUR DISTRICT
3 INSPECTOR OF POLICE
PALLADAM, THIRUPPUR DISTRICT. [ RESPONDENTS ]
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents and their subordinates from interfering with the day to day affairs of the petitioner Club in any way without any reasonable cause at the premises at No.5, SF.No.435/1A Thirupur Road, Therkupalayam Pirivu. Naranapuram, Palladam, Thirupur District.
For petitioner : Mr.K.Rajashrinivas
For respondents : Mr.S.Gopinathan
Additional Government Pleader
O R D E R
Mr.S.Gopinathan, the learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition for a Mandamus, to forbear the respondents and their subordinates from interfering with the day-to-day affairs of the petitioner club, in any way, without any reasonable cause, at the premises No.5, SF.No.435/1A Thirupur Road, Therkupalayam Pirivu. Naranapuram, Palladam, Thirupur District.
3. In similar circumstances, this Court, in the case of Anandham Manamagil Mandram v. The Superintendent of Police, reported in 2009(4) CTC 264, had issued certain directions. In view of the earlier order passed by this Court, in the above decision, the following directions are issued in the present writ petition.
(i) The petitioner, the office bearers and the members of the petitioner Club are entitled to carry on lawful activities, within the premises of the club and there should not be any interference from the police authorities, so long as their activities are not in violation of the provisions of the Public Gambling Act, 1867/Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930, and the other relevant provisions of law.
(ii) In the normal circumstances, there should be no interference in the lawful functioning of the petitioner Club, by the Police. It is not permissible for the police to enter the Club premises, as a routine measure, so long as the Club is functioning, within the frame work of law;
(iii) If the police authorities have specific information or a reasonable doubt that the activities, carried on by the Club, its office bearers or its members and the others associated with it, are not in accordance with law, or that they are indulging in unlawful activities, in violation of the provisions of the Public Gambling Act, 1867/Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930, or any other relevant enactment, it would be open to them, after recording reasons in the General Diary maintained in the Police Station, to proceed to enter the Club premises, conduct investigation, interrogate those who are involving themselves in such activities and to take appropriate action, on merits and as per law;
(iv) While exercising the powers conferred on the Police authorities, they should follow the mandatory provisions, as contained in Section 5 of the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930 / Public Gambling Act, 1867;
(v) It is always open to the Club or its members and the others associated with the club to challenge the action taken by the Police, if it was not in accordance with law;
(vi) In case the Police authorities are of the opinion that a situation has arisen warranting the suspension of the operation of the Club, in exercise of the powers conferred upon them, they have to issue an order in writing. When there is no authority or power granted to the Police authorities to issue an order of suspension, orally, they are not entitled to pass such oral orders; and
(vii) Before passing orders for the purpose of closure of the Club, in exercise of the powers conferred on the authorities concerned, they should follow the principles of natural justice. The Club should be given an opportunity to submit its objections, if any, and, if so desired, a further opportunity of personal hearing should also be given.
4. Following the earlier order passed by this Court, in Anandham Manamagil Mandram's case, cited supra, the Writ Petition stands disposed of with similar directions, as shown above. No costs. Connected M.P.No.1 of 2010 is closed.
lan To:
1 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE THIRUPPUR DISTRICT, THIRUPPUR 2 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALLADAM, THIRUPPUR DISTRICT 3 INSPECTOR OF POLICE PALLADAM, THIRUPPUR DISTRICT