1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 21-10-2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN W.P.(MD)No.11153 of 2011 And M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2011 Veeran .. Petitioner vs. 1.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai District. 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Thallakulam, Madurai City. 3.The Inspector of Police, Thallakulam, Madurai City. ` .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to grant permission to the petitioner to hold peaceful Dharna as per the representation dated 22.09.2011. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rajini For Respondents : Mr.K.Chellapandian, Additional Advocate General Mr.R.Karthikeyan Addl.Govt.Pleader O R D E R The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition seeking the issue of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to grant permission to the petitioner to hold a peaceful Dharna for protesting the Police firing at Paramakudi on 11.09.2011. 2.Heard Mr.A.Rajini, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Chellapandian, the learned Additional Advocate General along with Mr.R.Karthikeyan, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents. 3.To hold a dharna in protest against the Police firing that took place on 11.09.2011 at Paramakudi, the petitioner, representing an outfit known as 'Adi Tamizhar Peravai,' made a representation dated 22.09.2011 seeking permission. Since there was no response to the said representation, the petitioner has come up with the above writ petition. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. The present writ petition forms part of a batch of about five writ petitions, in which the requests made by similar organizations were rejected by the concerned authorities. Therefore, all the writ petitions taken up together for hearing. 5. In the first instance, Mr.K.Chellapandian, learned Additional Advocate General submitted that since the date on which the petitioners in all the five writ petitions wanted to hold meetings or conduct demonstrations has already passed, nothing survives for adjudication in the writ petitions. But the dismissal of the writ petitions on that ground would not actually resolve the problem, since the petitioners in the batch of writ petitions might submit one more application seeking permission to do the same thing on a different date. Therefore, I impressed upon the learned Additional Advocate General the futility of dismissing the writ petition on the ground that they had become infructuous. 6. Thereafter the learned Additional Advocate General submitted that since the different organizations want to organize protest meetings at different places on different dates, the burden of providing security would be heavy on the Police force. Therefore, the learned Additional Advocate General submitted that atleast if all of them agree to hold demonstrations or organize meetings on a single day at a particular place, it would be easy for the Police to manage. But it is submitted by all the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in all the writ petitions that time is not yet ripe for these various groups to unite and that since the petitioners in each of the writ petitions have a different agenda, it would make it impossible for all of them to come together. 7.In the light of the above statement, the learned Additional Advocate General submitted that permission could be granted to the petitioner if this writ petitioner as well as the petitioners in the other writ petitions agree to certain conditions. The learned Additional Advocate General also circulated a list of conditions subject to which permission could be granted. While the petitioners accepted some of the conditions, they objected to some others. However, there was a broad consensus with regard to the day, time and venue. 8. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed and a direction is issued to the respondents to permit the organisation run by the petitioner, to hold a peaceful demonstration in the form of fasting from 9.00 a.m., to 4.00 p.m., on 20.11.2011 at the Ambiga Theater Junction, Vaigai Colony, East Main Road, Madurai (Anna Nagar Police Station Limits). The petitioner shall ensure that there will be no damage to the public properties and the persons participating in the demonstration shall not carry any kind of weapons or sticks. The organiser shall strictly ensure that the demonstration takes place peacefully without any hindrance either to the flow of traffic or to the members of the public in any manner and without making https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 vituperative speeches inciting violence or offending the sentiments of people belonging to the other communities. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Records) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai District. 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Thallakulam, Madurai City. 3.The Inspector of Police, Thallakulam, Madurai City. ` +1cc to Mr.A.Rajini, Advocate, Sr.No.137044 W.P.(MD)No.11153 of 2011 21-10-2011 mpk SMA/09.11.2011/5C/3P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/