Sudalaimuthu vs The Assistant Superintendant of Police & Anr.

This Writ Petition has been filed to quash the order passed by the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.04/Se.Mu.Aa/ Vu.Kaa.Ka/ Serai/2018,

dated 08.01.2018.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order has been passed by the first respondent only, but, in the

writ petition, it has been wrongly mentioned as second respondent and the said mistake has occurred due to typical error. He further submitted that

the petitioner has sought permission for performing temple festival from 29.01.2018 to 31.01.2018 and during the said festival, the petitioner wants

to conduct Innisai Katchery. He further submitted that the first respondent has granted permission for performing temple festival, but he rejected

the petition in respect of the prayer for conducting Innisai Katchery without assigning any reason.

The learned Additional Government Pleader has submitted that though no reason has been stated in the impugned order, three cases were

already registered including the offence under Section 302 I.P.C., and that was the reason for not granting the permission to conduct Innisai

Katchery.

Considering the aforesaid submissions, the petitioner is directed to give fresh representation within two days and any such representation is

given, the first respondent has to consider and pass appropriate orders by giving reason.

With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.