1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04-11-2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN W.P.(MD)No.12607 of 2011 Pitchai .. Petitioner vs. 1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Madurai District. 3.The Inspector of Police, Othakadai Police Station, Madurai District. .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second and third respondents to grant permission for conducting Condolence Public Meeting on 6.11.2011 or any other date at Narasingam Road, Othakadai, Madurai District. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu For Respondents : Mr.R.Karthikeyan, Additional Government Pleader. O R D E R The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition, seeking a Mandamus to direct the second and third respondents to grant permission for conducting a condolence meeting on 6.11.2011. 2. Heard Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu, learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. Mr.R.Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government Pleader submitted on instructions that one Mr.Senthil Murugan, who was a member of an outfit called 'New Democratic Labour Front', was murdered on 26.10.2011 by anti social elements. Therefore, the Labour Front wanted to organise a public condolence meeting on 6.11.2011. Since permission was not granted, despite the representation made by the petitioner, the petitioner has come up with the above writ petition. 4. The learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that after the murder of the said person, the members belonging to the New https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 Democratic Labour Front started gheraoing the Police Station demanding the arrest of the friends of two persons who are already arrested. Therefore, for fear of creation of law and order problem, the respondents 2 and 3 have not granted permission to hold a meeting. 5. But the reason stated by the respondents, hardly provides a justification for not considering the request of the petitioner to hold a condolence meeting, on the occasion of the 11th day of the demise of one of their members. It is especially so, in view of the fact that the case has no political, communal or casteist overtones. It is a pure and simple case of the death of a member of a labour organisation, for which the organisation wants to hold a public condolence meeting. Therefore, I do not think that the respondents are justified in refusing to grant permission. 6. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed, directing the respondents 2 and 3 to grant permission to the petitioner to hold a public condolence meeting, strictly between 6.00 P.M., and 9.00 P.M., as requested by them, at Narasingam Salai on 6.11.2011. But the petitioner shall ensure the orderly conduct of the meeting without any hindrance to the flow of traffic and without causing any disturbance to the other members of the public or the residents of the locality. The petitioner shall also ensure that no vituperative speeches inciting violence is made on that date. 7. The writ petition is allowed on the above terms. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Madurai District. 3.The Inspector of Police, Othakadai Police Station, Madurai District. +1cc to Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu, Advocate, Sr.No. 38239 svn ssk/04.11.2011 /5c -2p/- W.P.(MD)No.12607 of 2011 04-11-2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/