Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 180 Mad
Judgement Date : 3 January, 2024
W.P(MD)No.31350 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 03.01.2024
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
W.P(MD)No.31350 of 2023
Dream Recreation Club-Madurai South,
represented by its President,
Senthilkumar ...Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City,
Madurai.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Theppakulam Police Station,
Madurai City. ...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the
second respondent herein from interfering with the lawful day to day
activities of our association namely Dream Recreation Club-Madurai
South without following the due process of law.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sathish Kumar
For Respondents : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.31350 of 2023
ORDER
The Petitioner in this Writ Petition seeks Mandamus against the
Respondents No.1 and 2 from interfering with the contract and the
activities of the club.
2. It is the further submission of the learned Counsel for the
Petitioner that no illegal activities are carried out in the club. Also he
had submitted that the club was registered under the Tamil Nadu
Societies Registration Act, 1975 (Tamil Nadu Act 27 of 1975).
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the
Petitioner/club registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration
Act, 1975 (Tamil Nadu Act 27 of 1975), had not obtained any permission
from the first Respondent regarding the club as per the statute. Also he
submitted that the same Petitioner was involved in two other cases.
Therefore, he cannot seek Writ of Mandamus against the Police officials,
who are performing their duty.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner by way of rejoinder relied
on the covered judgment by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.3705 of 2014.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor also submitted that
they have not obtained permission from the statutory authorities under
the Public Premises Act. The ruling cited by the learned Counsel for the
Petitioner claiming that it is covered will not help the case of the
Petitioner. The Petitioner had only registered under the Tamil Nadu
Societies Registration Act. They have to obtain permission for running
the club from the Police officials as per the "Tamil Nadu Public
Building Act, 1965".
6. In the light of the above submission by the learned Additional
Public Prosecutor, this petition is liable to be dismissed. The Petitioner
is directed to file appropriate petition before the competent authority
under the "Tamil Nadu Public Building Act, 1965" for permission to
run the club.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. With the above said direction, this Writ Petition is dismissed.
No costs.
03.01.2024 Internet:Yes Index :Yes/No jbr
To
1. The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai.
2. The Inspector of Police, Theppakulam Police Station, Madurai City.
3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.
jbr
03.01.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!