Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Bharathraj, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court challenging an order dated 14.12.2024 passed by the Inspector of Police, Sivagiri Police Station (second respondent). The impugned order rejected the petitioner's request for permission and police protection to conduct a 'Minnoli Kabadi Tournament' with loudspeaker from 14.01.2025 to 15.01.2025 and sports events for school and college children, elders, and women from 16.01.2025 to 17.01.2025 at Immanuvel Ground, Duraisamyapuram Village, Sivagiri Taluk, Thenkasi District, as part of the Thai Pongal Festival. The petitioner contended that the rejection was based solely on a representation made by the third respondent, Sathishkumar, who had no connection with the petitioner's village. The third respondent had earlier filed W.P.(MD)No.28529 of 2024, and this Court by order dated 29.11.2024 directed the police to consider his representation dated 08.10.2024 following the Circular of the Director General of Police. The court observed that the impugned order did not reflect any independent application of mind by the police and was passed merely on the basis of the third respondent's objection. The court held that the police have the power to impose conditions to maintain law and order but cannot outrightly reject permission without valid reasons. Accordingly, the court quashed the impugned order and directed the respondents 1 and 2 to grant permission for the events subject to conditions such as ensuring no disturbance to public order, compliance with noise pollution rules, and providing adequate police protection. The writ petition was allowed with the above directions.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Article 226 of Constitution of India - Certiorarified Mandamus - Challenge to police order rejecting permission for conducting sports events - Court held that the impugned order was passed solely based on a third party's representation without independent application of mind - Directed police to grant permission subject to conditions ensuring law and order (Paras 1-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the police order rejecting permission for conducting a kabaddi tournament and sports events with loudspeaker during Thai Pongal festival is legal and valid.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 14.12.2024 is quashed. The respondents 1 and 2 are directed to grant permission for conducting the Minnoli Kabadi Tournament and sports events with loudspeaker on the dates mentioned, subject to conditions including maintaining law and order, compliance with noise pollution rules, and providing adequate police protection. The writ petition is allowed.
Law Points
- Right to conduct cultural and sports events
- Police power to impose conditions
- Article 226 of Constitution of India
- Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 352
W.P.(MD)No.31396 of 2024 and W.M.P.(MD)No.26296 of 2024
Mr.T.Indrachithu (for petitioner), Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar (Additional Public Prosecutor for respondents 1 & 2), Mr.D.Rajaboopathy (for respondent No.3)
1.The Superintendent of Police, Thenkasi District, Thenkasi; 2.The Inspector of Police, Sivagiri Police Station, Thenkasi District; 3.Sathishkumar
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging police order rejecting permission for conducting a kabaddi tournament and sports events with loudspeaker during Thai Pongal festival.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of impugned order dated 14.12.2024 and direction to respondents 1 and 2 to grant permission and provide police protection for the events.
Filing Reason
The second respondent rejected the petitioner's request for permission and police protection to conduct the events, citing a representation by the third respondent who had no connection with the village.
Previous Decisions
The third respondent had earlier filed W.P.(MD)No.28529 of 2024, and this Court by order dated 29.11.2024 directed the police to consider his representation dated 08.10.2024 following the Circular of the Director General of Police.
Issues
Whether the impugned order rejecting permission for conducting sports events is legal and valid.
Whether the police can reject permission solely based on a third party's representation without independent application of mind.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the third respondent has no connection with the village and the rejection was based solely on his representation.
Respondents 1 and 2 submitted that they would abide by the court's order.
Third respondent opposed the petition.
Ratio Decidendi
The police have the power to impose conditions to maintain law and order but cannot reject permission outrightly without independent application of mind. An order based solely on a third party's representation without considering the merits is illegal and liable to be quashed.
Judgment Excerpts
The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the second respondent dated 14.12.2024, rejecting the petitioner's request to grant necessary permission and provide police protection for conducting the Minnoli Kabadi Tournament with loud speaker...
The contention of the petitioner is that the reason cited in the impugned order is that the third respondent who has got nothing to do with the petitioner's village had earlier filed W.P.(MD)No.28529 of 2024...
Procedural History
The petitioner applied for permission to conduct sports events. The second respondent rejected the request by order dated 14.12.2024. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition on 03.01.2025. The court heard the matter and passed the final order on the same day.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
