Dmk agitation case full order THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN & T HE HON’BLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA by Sekar Reporter · December 23, 2019 [12/23, 07:19] Sekarreporter 1: W.M.P.No.36634 of 2019 in W.P.Nos.35712 and W.P.35713 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 22.12.2019 CORAM THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN & T HE HON’BLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA W.M.P.No.36634 of 2019 in W.P.Nos.35712 and W.P.35713 of 2019 W.M.P.No.36634 of 2019 in W.P.No.35712 of 2019 Varaaki S/o.Radhakrishnan Founder and President Indian Makkal Mandram No.2/3, Sudhananda Bharathi Street, Ganapathipuram, East Tambaram, Chennai-600 059. … Petitioner -vs- The Chief Secretary, Secretariat, St.George Fort, Chennai-600 009. The Home Secretary, Secretariat, St.George Fort, Chennai-600 009. 1/10 [12/23, 07:20] Sekarreporter 1: W.M.P.No.36634 of 2019 in W.P.Nos.35712 and W.P.35713 of 2019 The Director General of Police, O/o.The Director General of Police Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. The Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police Commissionarate Veppery, Chennai-600 007. … Respondents P rayer in WP: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents herein from giving any kind of permission to the unlawful demonstration to be conducted on 23.12.2019 by the Opposition Parties in the State of Tamil Nadu. Prayer in WMP: To grant an order of interim injunction restraining the opposition Parties in the State of Tamil Nadu from proceeding with the unlawful Demonstration to be conducted on 23.12.2019, pending disposal of the Writ Petition. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Janakiram For Respondents : Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayan Govt. Pleader W.P.No.35713 of 2019 A.Ezhilarasu S/o.Arunachalam 97, APH Road, Ezil Rajkumar Illam, Avadi, Chennai-600 054. … Petitioner -vs- 2/10 [12/23, 07:20] Sekarreporter 1: W.M.P.No.36634 of 2019 in W.P.Nos.35712 and W.P.35713 of 2019 Mr.Thamimun Ansari M.L.A., General Secretary Manitha Neya Jananayaga Katchi 26, Kalitheru, Thoppudurai Post Vedharanyan Taluk, Nagapattinaum District The General Secretary Social Democratic Party of India, (SDPI) 4/7, Ibrahim Sahib Street, Seethakadi Nagar, Mannady, Chennnai-1. The Chief Secretary Govt of Tamilnadu Secretariat, Fort St George Chennai-600 009. The Director General of Police State Police Head Quarters Government of Tamil Nadu Secretariat, Fort St.George Chennai-600 009. The Commissioner of Police Greater Chennai Vepery, Egmore Chennai-600 008. The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Municipal Corporation, Chennai … Respondents P rayer in WP: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the 15 th and 16 th respondents not to permit the 1 st to 13 th respondents to conduct the scheduled rally / procession / 5/10 [12/23, 07:20] Sekarreporter 1: W.M.P.No.36634 of 2019 in W.P.Nos.35712 and W.P.35713 of 2019 protest on 23.12.2019 as against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 since the same kind of held procession in Delhi, Karnataka, U.P., Assalm turned violent and affected the Normal Tempo of life, in the larger interest of public, public properties and to protect the law and order on the basis of The Newspaper Report published in Dinamalar Tamil Daily dated 21.12.2019. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Krishnamurthy For R14 to R17 : Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayan Govt. Pleader I N T E R I M O R D E R S.VAIDYANATHAN,J., AND P.T.ASHA,J., The Writ Petition in W.P.No.35713 of 2019 is admitted. Notice. The petitioners seek to forbear the respondents herein from giving any kind of permission to the unlawful demonstration to be conducted on 23.12.2019 by the Opposition Parties in the State of Tamil Nadu. When the matters are taken up for hearing, it is represented by the 6/10 [12/23, 07:21] Sekarreporter 1: W.M.P.No.36634 of 2019 in W.P.Nos.35712 and W.P.35713 of 2019 The rejection order dated 22.12.2019 has not been challenged by the respondents in W.P.No.35713 of 2019. However, the petitioners apprehend that there may be untoward incident, if the respondents, defying the rejection order, proceeds to conduct the demonstration/protest and they, therefore, seek to forbear the respondents from giving any kind of permission to the unlawful demonstration to be conducted on 23.12.2019 by the Opposition Parties in the State of Tamil Nadu. In a democratic country, a peaceful demonstration cannot be prevented, as it is the backbone of the democratic set up. From the reply given by the respondents, it could be seen that the political party, which is scheduled to conduct the rally / procession / protest, is reluctant to take on responsibility. However, according to us, the queries raised by the Police are indeed very relevant to the present case on hand in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Destruction of Public and Private Properties vs. State of A.P. and Others, reported in AIR 2009 SC 2266, in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court has stated as follows: 8/10 [12/23, 07:21] Sekarreporter 1: W.M.P.No.36634 of 2019 in W.P.Nos.35712 and W.P.35713 of 2019 Though the reply given by the Government Pleader is convincing, we do not want to play with the life of innocent people in case of any untoward incident and it is the duty of the Court to protect every citizen of the State in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme in the case of Destruction of Public and Private Properties vs. State of A.P. and Others (cited supra). Hence, as an interim measure, in the event of the political parties proceeding with the agitation “DESPITE REFUSAL” there shall be an interim direction to the Police that the entire area, including the diverted area as found mentioned in the pamphlet of the respondents (it was not originally indicated in the application made by them), for which the permission for procession is sought should be videographed and the drone technology can also be used for the purpose of recording the demonstration so that the liability can be foisted on the leaders and not on the followers. Notice. Post on 30.12.2019. Sd…/- 22.12.2019 2/2 10/10
[3/4, 17:53] Sekarreporter 1: [3/4, 17:47] K. Chandru Former Judge Of Highcourt: Very rarely an additional judge is transferred before becoming permanent!it is not the case of justice kannan who went to P&H hc.It looks as if he was originally to be appointed in Delhi HC.Since that might not have been possible he was appointed here only to be shifted by transfer mode!Madras Hc has become launching pad for many and it looks like a transit house!!It is a pity that the Bar never discusses such issues! [3/4, 17:51] Sekarreporter 1: [3/4, 18:01] K. Chandru Former Judge Of Highcourt: In service law there are several methods of appointing a person to a post.They are direct recruitment (e.g.Bar),promotion(e.g.service judges).But their there is yet another source .i.e.”transfer from other service”.This method is slowly entering in to the service of higher judiciary &it is not found in the Constitution.Justice MM Ismail was appointed in Delhi High court,when that court was created for the first time[1964] .After an year he was appointed to our high court in( 1965).!! It was not an involuntary act.After 55 years there is a repeat performance in a reverse order!!!! March 4, 2020 by Sekar Reporter · Published March 4, 2020
Breaking: இந்திய குற்றவியல் சட்டங்களுக்கு பதிலாக 3 மாற்று சட்டங்களுக்குகான மசோதா மக்களவையில் அறிமுகப்படுத்தப்பட்டு விவாதம் நடந்து வருகிறது கிட்டத்தட்ட எல்லா எதிர்க்கட்சி எம்பிக்கள் சஸ்பெண்ட் செய்யப்பட்டுள்ள நிலையில் விவாதம் நடந்து வருகிறது December 20, 2023 by Sekar Reporter · Published December 20, 2023
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE PARESH UPADHYAY AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY W.A.Nos.30, 40, 54, 53, 48, 41, 49, 51 and 45 of 2022. For Appellants : Mr.P.Kumaresan, (in all Appeals) Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.M.Rajendran, Additional Government Pleader For Respondent : Mr.K.Ravi Anantha Padmanabhan (in all Appeals) COMMON JUDGMENT D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. Police promotion case order sjngle judge setaside October 22, 2022 by Sekar Reporter · Published October 22, 2022