Madras High Court
A.Nagaraj vs The Secretary on 13 February, 2015
Author: B.Rajendran
Bench: B.Rajendran
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13.02.2015 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN W.P.(MD)No.1869 of 2015 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2015 A.Nagaraj .. Petitioner Vs 1.The Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Department of Municipal and Local Administration, St.George Fort, Secretariat, Chennai-9. 2.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District. 3.The Rameswaram Municipality, rep.by its Municipal Commissioner, Rameswaram, Ramanathapuram District. .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 07.10.2014 on the file of Respondent No.2 and quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the respondents 1 to 3 to immediately reopen the closed streets and resume vehicular traffic in the streets around Ramanathaswamy Temple, Rameswaram, within the time frame stipulated by this Court. !For Petitioner : Mr.S.Rajasekar ^For Respondents : Mr.R.Karthikeyan, Additional Government Pleader :ORDER
This writ petition is filed to quash the impugned proceedings dated 07.10.2014 on the ground that the police has no authority at all to stop the vehicular movement in the four-roads of the Rameswaram Temple, and it affects their business right. The petitioner states that he is having a lodge and having his business around the temple in Rameswaram. He also states that there are several lodges located around the temple, and in view of the stoppage of vehicular movement by the police, the right to conduct the business is lost and therefore, he contends that the blanket order restricting the vehicles, should not be there.
2.The learned Additional Government Pleader, on instructions from the concerned Sub-Inspector of Police, would contend that, earlier a writ petition was filed before this Court in which the petitioners therein restricted their prayer only to consider their representation, viz. to permit the vehicle to come and drop the yathrigars in the respective places and go back to the place of stoppage, and as per the order passed by this Court, a Peace Committee Meeting was conducted along with all the representatives, and that the petitioner's representation was also considered and a solution was arrived at taking into consideration the threat of the temple and the huge crowd coming from different places. He also submitted that in the Peace Committee Meeting, it was only decided to recommend certain aspects and those recommendations cannot be questioned here, when the petitioner himself had participated in the Peace Committee Meeting.
3.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side.
4.At the outset, this writ petition as such, is not maintainable, because the petitioner's earlier representation was directed to be considered by this Court and the police, in tune with the said order, called for a joint Peace Committee Meeting and all the representatives have participated in the meeting and have arrived at a consensus idea. The Police have already taken into consideration the main grievance, ie., threat to the temple, and in order to provide security to the temple which is of paramount importance, have made some suggestions in the meeting, as under:
?nkw;go fye;jha;t[ Tl;lj;jpy;, ,uhnk];tuk; mUs;kpF ,uhkehjRthkp nfhtpYf;F kpul;ly; cs;sjhYk;, vspjhf fly; khh;f;fkhf jPtputhjpfs; cs;ns EiHtjw;F rhj;jpaTWfs; mjpf mst[ cs;sjhYk;, nkYk;, mjpf ahj;hPfh;fs; gy khepyq;fspy; ,Ue;Jk; kw;Wk; btspehLfspy; ,Ue;Jk; tUtjhYk;, gf;jh;fs; ghJfhg;g[, caph; nrjk; kw;Wk; nfhtpy; ghJfhg;g[ fUjp ehd;F ujtPjpfspy; nghf;Ftuj;J jil bra;ag;gl;Ls;sJ. ,Ue;jhYk; Tl;lj;jpy; brhd;d fUj;Jf;fshd ehd;F ujtPjpfspy;, kpdp g]; ,af;Ftjw;Fk; kw;Wk; nfhtpy; fhty; epiyak; mUfpy; 108 Mk;g[yd;]; epWj;Jtjw;Fk;, ngl;lhp fhh;fis mjpf mstpy; ,af;ft[k;, bjw;F ujtPjpapy; khw;Wg;ghij mikf;ft[k; Toa tpiutpy; eltof;if nkw;bfhs;sg;gLk; vd;W Kot[ bra;ag;gl;lJ.?
5.In view of the above, nothing survives in this writ petition for consideration. However, this Court can only say that proper steps have to be taken as per the recommendations made in the Peace Committee Meeting. Accordingly, the authorities are directed to take proper steps as per the recommendations made in the Peace Committee Meeting, as expeditiously as possible.
6.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.
Index : Yes/No 13.02.2015 Internet : Yes/No KM To 1.The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu,
Department of Municipal and Local Administration, St.George Fort, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.the Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Municipal Commissioner, Rameswaram Municipality, Rameswaram, Ramanathapuram District.
B.RAJENDRAN, J.
KM W.P.(MD)No.1869 of 2015 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2015 13.02.2015