Thursday, Aug 01, 2002
Thursday, Aug 01, 2002 |
| Southern States | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Southern States
-
Tamil Nadu
By J. Venkatesan
A three-judge Bench, comprising the Chief Justice B.N. Kirpal, Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justice Arijit Pasayat, passed this brief order after the State Home Secretary filed a fresh affidavit seeking reconsideration of an earlier order banning public meetings and political processions blocking main roads in the State and to vest discretion with the authorities to grant or reject permission. Responding to the court's direction to the State to frame rules regulating meetings and processions, the Home Secretary submitted that the State Cabinet which met on July 19 considered that police already had powers under the existing enactments to regulate processions and meetings which had the potential of causing violence, including damage to properties and injuries to people. He submitted that it was considered that a blanket ban might cause complications and that a decision had to be taken in each case with reference to the nature and purpose of the meeting or procession, the antecedents of the organisers, and whether there would be any prejudice in the maintenance of law and order, public tranquillity, peace and security of the State. Pointing out that the Government had scrupulously observed the earlier orders of the court, the Home Secretary said that there should be an element of discretion with the authorities of the State in this matter. Senior Counsel for the State, V.A. Bobde, told the court as to why such a ban was being applied to Tamil Nadu alone when similar processions and meetings were allowed to be held in other parts of the country. He cited the recent instance of the `rath yatra' held in Gujarat. However, K.K. Mani, counsel for the petitioner, K.K. Road Merchants, Entrepreneurs and Residents Welfare Association, Villupuram, submitted that roads should not be blocked to hold meetings or processions. The Bench then indicated that it would dispose of the petition by passing an order that no temporary or permanent structure would be allowed on a main road. The Bench, however, adjourned the matter by four weeks at the instance of the State Counsel to get instructions.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2002, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
