Chetpet Thalir Pookkal Ul Aranga Vilaiyattu(Chess v. The Superintendent of Police, Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai.2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Polur
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Considering the limited nature of the relief sought for in the writ petition, without going into the merits of the representation submitted by the petitioner Sangam, this Court directs the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 22.07.2025 and dispose of…
Judgment
W.P.(Crl.) No.608 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 19.08.2025CORAM :THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMARW.P.(Crl.)No.608 of 2025andW.P.M.P.Crl. No.284 of 2025 Chetpet Thalir Pookkal Ul Aranga Vilaiyattu(Chess, Carrom) Munetra Nala Sangam, Reg. No.SRG/Tiruvannamalai/34/2025Represented by its Vice President, ESAIYAS,Having office atNo.83, Arani Road, Gengaisudamani, Chetpet Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District. ... PetitionerVs.
The Superintendent of Police, Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai.
The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Polur, Tiruvannamalai District.
The Inspector of Police, Chetpet Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District. ... RespondentsPage 1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.) No.608 of 2025 Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 22.07.2025 and consequently, direct the respondents 2 and 3 not to disturb the peaceful functioning of the petitioner's Sangam. For Petitioner: Mr.E.KannadasanFor R1 to R3:Mr.R.Vinothraja, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
O R D E RThis writ petition is filed to direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 22.07.2025 and consequently, to direct the respondents 2 and 3 not to disturb the peaceful functioning of the petitioner's Sangam. 2. The petitioner is a Sangam functioning to develop the skill in sports, games and social activities and the petitioner Sangam is registered with the Registrar of Societies, Tiruvannamali District on 22.07.2025 vide Sl.No.SRG/Tiruvannamalai/34/2025. The petitioner Sangam has conducted Page 2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.) No.608 of 2025one or two tournaments and apart from that, it encourages the education among the downtrodden and they are also distributing books and accessories to poor students from and out of its funds and they have undertaken many laudable projects to the needy living below the poverty line. While so, the respondents 2 and 3 are interfering the peaceful functioning of the petitioner Sangam by framing trumped up charges against the Sangam and its members. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation to the 1st respondent on 22.07.2025 requesting him to direct the respondents 2 and 3 not to disturb the peaceful functioning of the petitioner Sangam. However, the same has not been acted upon. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel on either side.
Operative part
Considering the limited nature of the relief sought for in the writ petition, without going into the merits of the representation submitted by the petitioner Sangam, this Court directs the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 22.07.2025 and dispose of the same on its own merits and in accordance with law. Page 3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.) No.608 of 20255.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.19.08.2025mknInternet: Yes Index : Yes / NoSpeaking order : Yes / NoNeutral Citation : Yes / NoTo1.The Superintendent of Police, Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai. 2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Polur, Tiruvannamalai District. 3. The Inspector of Police, Chetpet Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District. 4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. Page 4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.) No.608 of 2025N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.mknW.P.(Crl.)No.608 of 2025 Page 5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(Crl.) No.608 of 202519.08.2025Page 6 of 6
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.