Madras High Court
B.Sundara Rajan vs The Secretary To Government on 30 November, 2021
W.P(MD)No.21115 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 30.11.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
W.P(MD)No.21115 of 2021
B.Sundara Rajan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Secretary to Government,
Home Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Secretary to Government,
Law Department,
Chennai – 600 009.
3.The Director General of Police,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004.
4.The Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City,
Madurai – 625 002. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent to
take stringent action against those persons/Association of Persons who
indulge in illegal activities like Katta Panchayat/Kangaroo Court in the
name of Human Rights and Consumer Forum and prohibit using the term
Human Rights and Consumer Forum.
For Petitioner : Mr.Niranjan S.Kumar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1/6
W.P(MD)No.21115 of 2021
For Respondents : Mr.P.Thilakkumar
Government Pleader
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J.)
The writ petitioner has filed this Writ Petition, seeking for issuance
of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the police authorities to take stringent
action against those persons/Association of Persons, who indulge in
illegal activities like Katta Panchayat/Kangaroo Court in the name of
Human Rights and Consumer Forum and prohibit using the term Human
Rights and Consumer Forum.
2.It is well known fact that there is a National Human Rights
Commission and also a State Human Rights Commission and a National
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and also a State Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission. Both the forums are statutory bodies.
According to the petitioner, there are several bodies or Societies using
the name of Human Rights and Consumer Forum, misleading the public
and doing Katta Panchayats.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner himself has brought to the
knowledge of this Court, the Circular issued by the Director General of
Police, Tamil Nadu, dated 13.10.2021, which states that whenever the
phrase 'Human Rights' is used, it has to be mentioned that it is a private
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 2/6
W.P(MD)No.21115 of 2021
organization and they cannot identify themselves with the National or
State Human Rights Commission or the Consumer Redressal Forum.
Such circular also prohibits display of name boards and stickers posing
themselves to be an authorised Human Right Commission or Forum.
Whenever the stickers of Human Rights Union/State/Counsel is found
and mislead the people by issuing false Identity Cards etc., the same
may be intimated to the police authorities, who shall take immediate
action.
4.The grievance of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that
despite such circular there has been use of the phrase Human Rights
Forum or Consumer Redressal Forum by several people by using the
same words and they are misleading the people.
5.As has been stated supra, already there is a circular by the
Director General of Police. Whenever, the petitioner come across such
Human Rights Forum or Council, which is not connected with the
statutory body, he can bring it to the notice of the Police to take
appropriate action against them.
6.The judgment, that is produced by learned counsel for the
petitioner, in Abdul Rahman v. Inspector of Police, Pattukottai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 3/6
W.P(MD)No.21115 of 2021
reported in (2015) 5 MLJ 218, also states that nobody can use the
word Human Rights as per the circulars of the Central and State
Governments and even as per the said circulars, it is exclusively meant
for the State to protect the rights of the people. Therefore, any such
wrong usage to mislead can be brought to the knowledge of the third and
fourth respondents, who in turn take action against such organizations.
7.As the direction sought for itself is to issue a Mandamus to the
respondents to take stringent action against those persons or
organizations involving in such illegal activities and the recent circular of
the Director General of Police is also in support of the same, there is no
necessity to issue separate order by this Court.
8.In the light of the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.
[P.S.N.,J] [P.V.,J.]
30.11.2021
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
sj
Note :
In view of the present lock down owing to
COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may
be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that
the copy of the order that is presented is the
correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the
advocate / litigant concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 4/6
W.P(MD)No.21115 of 2021
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
Home Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Secretary to Government,
Law Department,
Chennai – 600 009.
3.The Director General of Police,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004.
4.The Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City,
Madurai – 625 002.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 5/6
W.P(MD)No.21115 of 2021
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.
and
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
sj
W.P(MD)No.21115 of 2021
30.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 6/6
